IMPORTANT NOTICE - Subscription to Mailman lists disabled immediately

[Tanya Lattner via cfe-commits]

All,

We need to immediately disable subscription capabilities to all LLVM Mailman 
lists.

The current Mailman server is being abused by subscribing valid email addresses 
to our lists and because the list requires confirmation, the email address gets 
“spam”. An email address is subscribed upwards of 100 times in a short period 
of time in many cases. AWS has threatened to turn off our instance unless we 
take immediate action. Given the time frame of the situation (24 hours to 
resolve), we have no choice but to disable all new subscription capabilities as 
we can not distinguish between a real subscription attempt versus the abuse. 

Those currently subscribed should see no changes or impact to their workflow. 

I am sure this raises a lot of questions for the LLVM community and we are 
working hard and as quickly as possible on a permanent solution to this 
situation.

Thanks,
Tanya Lattner
LLVM Foundation

___
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Re: r308044 - Add documentation for @available

[Tanya Lattner via cfe-commits]

> On Jul 18, 2017, at 8:07 AM, Nico Weber  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Aaron Ballman  > wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Nico Weber  > wrote:
> > Aaron, https://clang.llvm.org/docs/AttributeReference.html#availability 
> > 
> > still doesn't have the AttrDocs.td change I made in this change 2 days ago.
> > Do I have to do anything to get it to update?
> 
> No, it's expected to update once a day, usually pretty early in the
> morning EST (ridiculously early PST).
> 
> Tanya, I've not seen any failure emails for building from AttrDocs.td.
> Did I get removed from that list when we updated? If so, I'm happy to
> continue to receive it to help resolve problems, but in the interim,
> do you happen to know more about what's going on?
> 
> Tanya, ping?
>  

FYI this is fixed. Had a permission problem that occurred after the SVN move.

Aaron, I will add you back to the script email as its just sending to the 
mailing list right now.

-Tanya


> 
> Thanks!
> 
> ~Aaron
> 
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Nico Weber via cfe-commits
> > > wrote:
> >>
> >> Author: nico
> >> Date: Fri Jul 14 11:40:52 2017
> >> New Revision: 308044
> >>
> >> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=308044=rev 
> >> 
> >> Log:
> >> Add documentation for @available
> >>
> >> https://reviews.llvm.org/D35379 
> >>
> >> Modified:
> >> cfe/trunk/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst
> >> cfe/trunk/include/clang/Basic/AttrDocs.td
> >>
> >> Modified: cfe/trunk/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst
> >> URL:
> >> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project/cfe/trunk/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst?rev=308044=308043=308044=diff
> >>  
> >> 
> >>
> >> ==
> >> --- cfe/trunk/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst (original)
> >> +++ cfe/trunk/docs/LanguageExtensions.rst Fri Jul 14 11:40:52 2017
> >> @@ -1271,6 +1271,87 @@ Further examples of these attributes are
> >>  Query for these features with ``__has_attribute(ns_consumed)``,
> >>  ``__has_attribute(ns_returns_retained)``, etc.
> >>
> >> +Objective-C @available
> >> +--
> >> +
> >> +It is possible to use the newest SDK but still build a program that can
> >> run on
> >> +older versions of macOS and iOS by passing ``-mmacosx-version-info=`` /
> >> +``--miphoneos-version-min=``.
> >> +
> >> +Before LLVM 5.0, when calling a function that exists only in the OS
> >> that's
> >> +newer than the target OS (as determined by the minimum deployment
> >> version),
> >> +programmers had to carefully check if the function exists at runtime,
> >> using
> >> +null checks for weakly-linked C functions, ``+class`` for Objective-C
> >> classes,
> >> +and ``-respondsToSelector:`` or ``+instancesRespondToSelector:`` for
> >> +Objective-C methods.  If such a check was missed, the program would
> >> compile
> >> +fine, run fine on newer systems, but crash on older systems.
> >> +
> >> +As of LLVM 5.0, ``-Wunguarded-availability`` uses the `availability
> >> attributes
> >> + >> >`_
> >> together
> >> +with the new ``@available()`` keyword to assist with this issue.
> >> +When a method that's introduced in the OS newer than the target OS is
> >> called, a
> >> +-Wunguarded-availability warning is emitted if that call is not guarded:
> >> +
> >> +.. code-block:: objc
> >> +
> >> +  void my_fun(NSSomeClass* var) {
> >> +// If fancyNewMethod was added in e.g. macOS 10.12, but the code is
> >> +// built with -mmacosx-version-min=10.11, then this unconditional
> >> call
> >> +// will emit a -Wunguarded-availability warning:
> >> +[var fancyNewMethod];
> >> +  }
> >> +
> >> +To fix the warning and to avoid the crash on macOS 10.11, wrap it in
> >> +``if(@available())``:
> >> +
> >> +.. code-block:: objc
> >> +
> >> +  void my_fun(NSSomeClass* var) {
> >> +if (@available(macOS 10.12, *)) {
> >> +  [var fancyNewMethod];
> >> +} else {
> >> +  // Put fallback behavior for old macOS versions (and for non-mac
> >> +  // platforms) here.
> >> +}
> >> +  }
> >> +
> >> +The ``*`` is required and means that platforms not explicitly listed will
> >> take
> >> +the true branch, and the compiler will emit ``-Wunguarded-availability``
> >> +warnings for unlisted platforms based on those platform's deployment
> >> target.
> >> +More than one platform can be listed in ``@available()``:
> >> +
> >> +.. code-block:: objc
> >> +
> >>