On Jul 19, 2012, at 4:44 AM, Timur Iskhodzhanov wrote: > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 3:37 PM, João Matos <[email protected]> wrote: >> Not sure who is responsible for the MS mangler, the LLVM code owner >> list doesn't list anyone directly responsible for non-codegen Windows >> stuff. It would be nice to see someone assigned to this task, at the >> moment the Windows patches take a lot of time to be reviewed or get >> forgotten on the list. > I totally agree here.
It's me, and I'm afraid you'll just have to deal with me not being very responsive. I have a lot of things to watch and not as much time to do so as I might like. >> By the way, I don't think we need to enable blocks support in this test case. > Good point! > I've removed the unnecessary flags from the cc1 invocation, see the > updated patch I don't really understand what's going on in this patch at all. If there's a consistent rule here, it'd be nice to see a comment talking about it. Otherwise it seems very, very ad-hoc, which makes me worried that this it only works for the test cases we've run through it already. John. _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
