[cfe-commits] [PATCH] Add -fobjc-direct-class-refs

[John McCall]

On Jul 11, 2012, at 10:17 PM, David Blaikie wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Jonathan Schleifer <js at webkeks.org> wrote:
>> Am 12.07.2012 um 04:21 schrieb John McCall:
>>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Am 12.07.2012 um 02:58 schrieb John McCall:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Subscripting on objects has an existing meaning in fragile runtimes:
>>>>> it's pointer arithmetic.  Is that meaning useful?  Well, possibly not, but
>>>>> nonetheless such code has historically been valid.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> As such code does not exist for ObjFW as there is not that historical
>>>> part, I'd like to just forbid pointer arithmetics and allow subscripts.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> That seems totally reasonable.
>> 
>> 
>> Ok, then I'll add it using the way you described before.
>> 
>> 
>>> I added a test case (please do include tests in your patches!) and
>>> committed this as r160102.
>> 
>> 
>> Nice!
>> 
>> I'm not exactly sure as to how these tests work. From looking at the commit,
>> it seems it's ObjC code with comments that first specify the command to
>> compile and then define the expected in LLVM ASM?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> For the record, I should establish a policy here and give you some fair
>>> warning.  We're happy to keep support for ObjFW in the tree as long as
>>> you're maintaining your runtime.  If it ever looks like it's become a dead
>>> project, and we can't reach any maintainers for an extended period of time,
>>> we reserve the right to strip this code out as bit-rotted.  Okay?
>> 
>> 
>> That sounds fair. Please contact me at this e-mail address if there are any
>> questions regarding the ObjFW support. As long as you don't remove it
>> without contacting me, everything is fine by me :).
> 
> Might want to put that down in the code owners documentation and/or
> authors file if you haven't already.

We don't seem to have a place to put this kind of Clang-specific developer
"policy statement", and it doesn't really belong in the LLVM repository.
I could start a new page, or we could let the archive speak for itself.
Doug, thoughts?

John.