aaron.ballman added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D52395#1248608, @delesley wrote:
> With respect to data, I really think these patches should be tested against > Google's code base, because otherwise you're going to start seeing angry > rollbacks. However, I don't work on the C++ team any more, and I don't have > time to do it. When I was actively developing the analysis, I spent about > 90% of my time just running tests and fixing the code base. Each incremental > improvement in the analysis itself was a hard upward slog. If you're going > to be adding lots of improvements, we need to have someone at Google running > point. Do you have a recommendation for who this point person could be? What do we do if we cannot find such a person? (I assume we won't halt progress on thread safety analysis and that propose->review->accept->commit->revert is not an acceptable workflow.) Repository: rC Clang https://reviews.llvm.org/D52395 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
