This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: PING: Question: Need to store ObjC-specific info in type nodes.
- From: Alex Perez <aperez at student dot santarosa dot edu>
- To: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 15:38:07 -0800
- Subject: Re: PING: Question: Need to store ObjC-specific info in type nodes.
- References: <C4DA0684-0DC7-11D9-A90Bemail@example.com> <4D13FD83-0DF3-11D9-B012-000A95B1F520@apple.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <53912658-0DF6-11D9-B012-000A95B1F520@apple.com>
Geoffrey Keating wrote:
Well now you have had enough time. What's your excuse now? I know you
are likely busy, but you probably always are, so welcome to reality.
Please get up off your arse and either approve or reject these changes.
It's not too much to ask.
On 23/09/2004, at 11:38 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
Geoffrey Keating <email@example.com> writes:
On 23/09/2004, at 6:19 PM, Ziemowit Laski wrote:
Please, folks -- this ain't rocket science...
Does any C, C++ and/or global maintainer object to my proceeding
with (3) below?
Yes, I object.
... you could maybe be a little more specific?
I haven't had time to think about it yet, and that's why I object. I
can say that I don't like any of the proposed three solutions.
On another note, I'm beginning to wonder if you're intentionally trying
to obstruct ObjC++ from ever getting into GCC 4.0. If that happens, it
would, IMHO, be inexcusable, since it's ready /now/. But then again,
when it really comes down to it, my opinion doesn't matter. I can
definitively state that I speak for many when I say "we want ObjC++ in
GCC 4.0, damn it!"
Is it really too much to ask, Mr. Obstructionist Apple GCC dev (Geoff)?
I hope I'm wrong about my suspicions about your
possibly-questionable-intentions, and if that's the case I urge you to
PROVE to me, through *ACTIONS* and not just words, that you are not
trying to stop this from moving foreward.
Disgruntledly (sic) Yours,