<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Chandler,<div class=""> I am not a “politically correct” person, never have been, never will be.</div><div class="">If you are waiting for me to make a politically incorrect statement so you can jump</div><div class="">on it, let me assure you that you will never be disappointed.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">But if that’s all you do then you and llvm lose out. If you want to actually help</div><div class="">llvm move forward then you should judge what I say based on its merit, not on its</div><div class="">delivery.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The thing I will agree with you about is that people on this list are well intentioned.</div><div class="">But I still don’t believe my description of “poison” has ever been discussed before,</div><div class="">you were will intentioned in saying it has, but there is no reason to believe it has,</div><div class="">because every time I dig deeper into these issues I run into mis-conceptions and</div><div class="">mis-information. Faulty analysis based on faulty assumptions. Every time. If I sound </div><div class="">hyperbolic it is because I have gotten frustrated from continually running into this.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">And before you claim that I have insulted Dan, you might want to get his</div><div class="">opinion on the subject. My bet is he will react by saying “why didn’t I think</div><div class="">of that”, but in spite of my trying to contact him I have gotten no response.</div><div class="">Perhaps you will have better luck.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Finally, regarding John, when I pushed on the function-inlining example,</div><div class="">rather than responding to it he lashed out at me. That is unprofessional.</div><div class="">I said nothing about it at the time because I try to refrain from meta-discussions.</div><div class="">But it is another reason why I sound so hyperbolic. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Now, getting back to technical, I’m waiting for some C source code examples</div><div class="">showing how "Current transformations made by LLVM require [posion]”</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Peter Lawrence.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jun 28, 2017, at 6:47 PM, Chandler Carruth <<a href="mailto:chandlerc@gmail.com" class="">chandlerc@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="">On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 3:33 PM Peter Lawrence <<a href="mailto:peterl95124@sbcglobal.net" class="">peterl95124@sbcglobal.net</a>> wrote:<br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class="">Chandler,<div class=""> where we disagree is in whether the current project is moving the issue</div><div class="">forward. It is not. It is making the compiler more complex for no additional value.</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I mean, I also disagree with your analysis of where we disagree, and what is happening, but I don't think that matters much or will convince you of anything.</div><div class=""> <br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class="">The current project perpetuates the myth that “poison” is somehow required.<br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">No one thinks it is required at a theoretical level. Current transformations made by LLVM require it. We could always disable those transformations. The current project is attempting to see if there is a pragmatic set of transformations we can keep with a better definition.</div><div class=""> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class=""></div><div class="">It isn’t, and when I show proof of that you reply with “its in bug reports, etc”,</div><div class="">that’s BS and you know it, this hasn’t been explored.</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I'm sorry that I didn't have readily available citations in the other thread. If you can show what searches you have done that didn't find any results, I'm happy to try and help find them. But the way you say this doesn't come across as assuming good faith on the part of myself and others in these discussions. Within the LLVM community, please always assume good faith and don't accuse people of "BS".</div><div class=""> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class="">Dan created “poison” on a whim, and people picked up on it too<br class=""></div><div class="">without question. We’ve been stuck with this self-inflicted wound ever since, and it is</div><div class="">time to heal it.</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The way you have described this comes across as both hyperbolic and insulting to specific individuals.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This kind of behavior and rhetoric is not acceptable in the LLVM community, and multiple people have asked you to change tone and avoid this behavior. Bluntly, stop.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class="">John and I do not have a technical disagreement, John is having an emotional<br class=""></div><div class="">reaction to the fact that he doesn’t have an answer to the function-inlining question.</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This is yet another personal attack in your email.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">After talking to several people involved in these threads, I think that whatever technical points you are trying to make have been completely lost due to the repeated pattern of apparent hostility. Your emails are perceived as insulting and attacking people which is not an appropriate or professional way to engage in a technical discussion here.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The attitude and approach you are taking on the list is completely incompatible with this community and project.<br class=""></div><div class=""><br class="inbox-inbox-Apple-interchange-newline"></div><div class="">I still encourage you to modify LLVM and implement your approach. It is open source and easy to fork on GitHub. However, please don't continue sending emails to LLVM lists until you can do so without repeating this behavior.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">-Chandler</div></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>