[llvm-dev] Need help with code generation

[Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev]

On 22 March 2016 at 16:15, Chris Bieneman via llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> On Mar 22, 2016, at 11:57 AM, Lang Hames via llvm-dev
> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
>>
>> It is really annoying how much people care about "security" to criticize
>> my work,
>
>
> FWIW it was never my intention to criticize your work. I think your work is
> amazing, and I hope you continue. What I've taken issue with is the policy
> stance.
>
>
> I hesitate to even pile on this thread, but Lang said something here that I
> felt really needed to be highlighted:
>
> I think LLVM projects should aim for robustness even knowing they're going
> to fall short,
>
>
> More generally than this, my favorite thing about working on LLVM projects
> is that as a community we strive to very high software quality standards.
> Even if we don’t meet our own standards having them changes the community
> emphasis. I think having those standards is a huge part of why the LLVM
> codebase is as high quality as it is.
>
> I hope that a commitment to general software quality is a cornerstone of
> LLD. Not treating all segfaults as P0 bugs is not a decision based in
> software quality.
>

My last email on this thread or on the subject at all ever is to once
more point out that we have fewer crashes than llvm, so calling
something a bug doesn't seem to have the magical properties that are
implied.

I will be improving our relocation processing to make it faster and
more obviously correct for valid inputs. That is what I see as
quality.

If you think lld doing this or that on a hexedit creation should be
called a bug or any other name, you can call it that, but it will not
influence what I work on.

Cheers,
Rafael