Re: PING: Question: Need to store ObjC-specific info in type nodes.

[Alex Perez <aperez at student dot santarosa dot edu>]

Geoffrey Keating wrote:
> On 23/09/2004, at 11:38 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>
> > Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@apple.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.
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 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,
Alex Perez