On 16/05/18 14:56, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: > Richard Earnshaw wrote: > >>>> Which doesn't appear to have been approved. Did you follow up with Jeff? >>> >>> I'll get back to that one at some point - it'll take some time to agree on >>> a way >>> forward with the callback. >>> >>> Wilco >>> >>> >> >> So it seems to me that this should then be queued until that is resolved. > > Why? The patch as is doesn't at all depend on the resolution of how to improve > the callback. If we stopped all patches until GCC is 100% perfect we'd never > make any progress. > > Wilco >
Because we don't want to build up technical debt for things that should and can be fixed properly. R.
