carlosgalvezp added a comment. In D112730#3316646 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D112730#3316646>, @carlosgalvezp wrote:
> Thanks a lot @tonic for your update and for the work done in the last months > ! It's indeed very sad to hear the news. It's a pity that the work will > probably be duplicated in many local forks with sub-optimal solutions instead > of a centralized, high-quality, peer-reviewed open-source solution. > > I'm not very familiar with the terms so I'm not sure I fully understand the > reasons why we are advised not to proceed. Could you clarify/elaborate on > what it means "the exact patent burden is not disclosed"? I was hoping that > the written consent we got from AUTOSAR would be a strong basis to move > forward. In general it would also be good to know if there was any other impediment to move forward. This information would be extremely valuable to try and do better in the future - I'm thinking on the upcoming MISRA release. Chris Tapp (chair of MISRA) has been involved in similar discussions <https://discourse.llvm.org/t/clang-tidy-rfc-add-autosar-c-14-clang-tidy-module/59162/5> in the cfe-dev mailing list, so I think it would be beneficial for him to get this feedback and hopefully make the upcoming MISRA release easy to work with from this standpoint (if MISRA is interested in an open-source checker implementation, of course). Looking forward to your thoughts :) CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D112730/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D112730 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
