rjmccall added a comment. In D53738#1333276 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D53738#1333276>, @leonardchan wrote:
> In D53738#1326071 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D53738#1326071>, @rjmccall wrote: > > > I'm fine with making this change under the assumption that we've gotten the > > language rule right. Even if that weren't abstractly reasonable for > > general language work — and I do think it's reasonable when we have a > > good-faith question about the right semantics — this is clearly still an > > experimental implementation and will be for several months yet, and > > hopefully it won't take that long for us to get a response. > > > @rjmccall Have you received a response yet? If not, do you think you have an > estimate on the response time, or also mind sharing the contact information > if that's ok? I just have a coworker who's part of the committee. I think you might be over-opimistic about how quickly things get answered with the C committee, though. We should not allow our work to be blocked waiting for a response. Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D53738/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D53738 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
