Don’t want to push or force you, just curious: how is it going? :)
How much time it usually takes to review such patches?

P.S. I have got commit access few days ago, just fyi
-- 
AlexDenisov
Software Engineer, https://github.com/AlexDenisov

On 19 Jan 2015 at 18:29:51, jahanian ([email protected]) wrote:

Sorry, yes busy and vacation. Your patch looks good to me. I have a pending 
proposal which pretty much
describes what is implemented (with due credit :). Let’s wait for outcome of 
this proposal.

- Thanks, Fariborz

On Jan 17, 2015, at 1:44 PM, AlexDenisov <[email protected]> wrote:

I guess you’re busy with the next LLVM/Clang release, but just want to know how 
is it going with this patch.
Let me know if I can help somehow.
-- 
AlexDenisov
Software Engineer, https://github.com/AlexDenisov

On 10 Jan 2015 at 11:12:39, AlexDenisov ([email protected]) wrote:

Here is new version, without pointers.

-- 
AlexDenisov
Software Engineer, https://github.com/AlexDenisov

On 9 Jan 2015 at 20:14:47, jahanian ([email protected]) wrote:


We may not support boxing of any pointer types after all 
(as the underlying API does not manage the collected object).
So, final patch may need to address that. Please provide more tests 
for NSEdgeInsets and specifically, see that diagnostics come out when 
deployment target does not support it.
Otherwise, patch looks good. Please hang on to the patch until we have gone 
through
the language review process.

- Thanks, Fairborz


On Jan 6, 2015, at 10:23 AM, AlexDenisov <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you for response. 
I already sent another patch, it could be found here: 
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.compilers.clang.scm/114023

-- 
AlexDenisov
Software Engineer, https://github.com/AlexDenisov

On 5 Jan 2015 at 19:39:16, jahanian ([email protected]) wrote:


On Dec 24, 2014, at 3:29 AM, AlexDenisov <[email protected]> wrote:

Do the usual lookup to find the method which implements this syntax. Call 
Decl::getAvailability on this method. If it returns
anything other than AvailabilityResult::AR_Available 
Well, I understand this part, it’s pretty obvious. But what I don’t understand 
is:

issue an appropriate diagnostic.
What is appropriate diagnostic for AR_NotYetIntroduced?

Should I introduce this diagnostic? Or just show warning/error for 
Deprecated/Unavailable and ignore NotYetIntroduced AR?

It is sufficient to issue an unavailability diagnostics since diagnostic points 
to the method which has the availability info. as part of its declaration.

- Fariborz

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to