This is quite similar to James Madison and John Jay, two of the founding
father of the United States Bill of Rights, which enshrined guarantees of
personal freedoms and rights within the American Constitution.
Many companies rely on their founder to be the chief salesperson. This is
difficult as
We are not talking about some single recent incident, but about
decades of problematic behavior. At the last face-to-face GNU Tools
Cauldron, everybody I talked to about it had some story about being
harassed by RMS, had witnessed such harassment or heard from or knew
someone who had been.
I thi
Snapshot gcc-11-20210328 is now available on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/11-20210328/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 11 git branch
with the following options: git://gcc.gnu.org/git/gcc.git branch
You showed your colours with your first few posts, don't try to pretend you
are anything but a zealot and a nasty troll.
Come back when you've contributed more to the GNU project than attacking
those you see as its enemies. The people you are attacking have done more
for Free Software than you eve
On 3/28/21 8:20 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Thanks for clarifying your understanding of Nathan's goal.
I may indeed have misread and mistaken Nathan's goal and means.
I thought the goal was to improve the GCC community by addressing the
gender imbalance, and that the means (misguided, IMHO) was
-
Christopher Dimech
General Administrator - Naiad Informatics - GNU Project (Geocomputation)
- Geophysical Simulation
- Geological Subsurface Mapping
- Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation
- Natural Resource Exploration and Production
- Free Software Advocacy
> Sent: Monda
On Mar 28, 2021, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> It shows we don't tolerate harassment in our project.
It shows we will favor and engage in harassment against a certain
demographic group, while pretending or believing it will somehow
make for a welcoming atmosphere.
> everybody I talked to about it had
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 10:33:15AM -0400, JeanHeyd Meneide wrote:
> This is unacceptable. The only reason I was told - as early as
> yesterday, by Free Software advocates, to my socially distanced face -
> that Stallman was still here is because he was powerless and had no
> effect on the
The methods used to put a leash on Torvalds and Assange and the methods used
to put one on Stallman are too similar to ignore.
It hasn’t stopped there either, it is now being wielded as a way to yoke all
developers of mainstream software (whether mainstream and non-free, or
mainstream
and under a
On 3/27/2021 2:49 PM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 3/26/21 9:02 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
Dear members of the GCC Steering Committee (SC), I ask you to remove
Richard Stallman (RMS)
I do fully support Nathan's request.
Speaking strictly for myself, not as a representative of the steering
commi
On Mar 28, 2021, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> Nathan posted today's followup.
Erhm... Nathan, please accept my apologies.
I misread someone else's message under the false impression
it had come from you.
--
Alexandre Oliva, happy hacker https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo/
Free Software Activist
Setting aside whether or not RMS should be associated with the GCC
project for a bit, I'm particularly concerned about the tone of some of
the messages on this thread. People can and will have differences, and
that is fine. But the discussion needs to stay civil.
To those who have crosse
Hello, Siddhesh,
Thanks for clarifying your understanding of Nathan's goal.
I may indeed have misread and mistaken Nathan's goal and means.
I thought the goal was to improve the GCC community by addressing the
gender imbalance, and that the means (misguided, IMHO) was to distance
ourselves from
Dear GCC Community,
Hi. My name is JeanHeyd Meneide, my online moniker is "ThePhD"
(not an actual Doctor. Yet!). I spend a lot of my time hacking on C
and C++. Some of the things I've done include:
- Contributing (mostly) a Implementation [1]
- Doing a GSoC for GCC and writing up about fixes
On Sun, 2021-03-28 at 18:06 +0530, Saloni Garg wrote:
> Hi, I have tried the following examples with the fanalyzer option in
> g++.
>
> 1 (a)
> void myFunction()
> {
> char *p =new char;
> }
> int main()
> {
> func();
> return 0;
> }
BTW, are you familiar with Compiler Explorer (godbolt
On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, 13:50 Mark Wielaard, wrote:
> RMS actively undermines those who try to make our community a little
> bit more welcoming. Violating anti-harassment policies of
> conferences. Even those from the FSF by claiming to be above those
> policies because of his leadership position or
Alexandre,
Making our community more welcoming is indeed a process. And some
steps will just be symbolic. But I don't believe removing RMS from
(perceived) leadership positions in the GNU project and from the FSF
is just symbolic. And even for a symbolic step it is a powerful
one. It shows we don'
Hi, I have tried the following examples with the fanalyzer option in g++.
1 (a)
void myFunction()
{
char *p =new char;
}
int main()
{
func();
return 0;
}
1(b)
void myFunction()
{
try {
char *p = new char;
throw p;
}
catch(...) {
}
}
int main()
{
myFu
Hello,
Ok fair enough. I thought cleaner separation of FE and generics interface
would be useful feature. It would make adding new FE easier too hopefully.
We could provide either multiple FEs per binary or not.
Additionally, In single FE per binary option of my fegens cleanup scenario
we could av
Hello,
Yea ok got it. Ill reply. I dont get email notifications from him. Ill
prepare reply asap as of what we can or cannot do and what will be costs
and benefits. Then he/you can decide.
Best regards,
Pawel
niedz., 28.03.2021, 11:34 użytkownik Jonathan Wakely
napisał:
>
>
> On Sun, 28 Mar 20
On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, 02:20 pawel k., wrote:
> Hmm,
> Thanks. Not sure I can see answer from him. Ill recheck it.
>
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2021-March/235079.html
21 matches
Mail list logo
