[llvm-dev] LLD status update and performance chart

[James Molloy via llvm-dev]

Hi Rafael,

> That is not something I will be spending time at the moment.

This to me seems the crux of my problem with this thread and the last
thread about LLD development. I think it's completely understandable and
normal that you have your own priorities. However, the way this comes
across in these threads is more strong than the above; it comes across that
not only will *you* not spend time on something, but you won't allow
*others* to spend time on it either, even if it is their priority.

The way you have come across in this thread smacks of design by diktat
rather than consensus building.

James

On Tue, 13 Dec 2016 at 21:23 Rafael Avila de Espindola via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> > Instead of just waiting, I think we should discuss design requirements.
> Clang, for example, has a VFS layer too (in
> include/clang/Basic/VirtualFileSystem.h) which seems independent from
> Clang. Maybe we want to move it into LLVM and reuse it from both Clang and
> LLD. Would this VFS layer meet the requirements for an LLD VFS layer too?
>
> That is not something I will be spending time at the moment.
>
> Cheers,
> Rafael
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20161213/8eb78c7d/attachment.html>