llvm dev - Mar 2009 - [LLVMdev] Wiki?

If we get the blessing of one of the old-timers who is willing to
spend a little time reviewing postings, we can deal with the
'misleading information' issue.

In addition, it might be _useful_ to understand why people were misled.

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Nipun Arora <nipun2512 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I agree. Being a newbie myself, I can relate to what problems someone new
to
> llvm would have.
> While I think most of the stuff I have tried will be useful, I wouldn't
be
> entirely sure if its the best way to go about it.
> Thanks
> Nipun Arora
> Columbia University
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Anthony Danalis <adanalis at
eecs.utk.edu>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 11, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Jon Harrop wrote:
>>
>> > On Wednesday 11 March 2009 14:19:28 Vikram S. Adve wrote:
>> >> In principle, having a Wiki like this would be valuable.  In
>> >> practice,
>> >> I think there will need to be some sanity checking to make
sure
>> >> incorrect or misleading information is not added to it.
>> >
>> > Yes, I think a Wiki would be extremely valuable. I would
>> > particularly like to
>> > see information on which aspects of LLVM have problems and what
>> > conflicts
>> > exist (e.g. the first-class structs vs tail calls thing). I'm
not
>> > sure how
>> > such information could be organised though...
>> >
>>
>>
>> Probably there should be an "unreliable" section for those of
us who
>> want
>> to contribute but are newbies and might have understood something
wrong.
>> Or at least a way to label something as "try this at your own
risk" so
>> to speak.
>>
>> Anthony
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>

On Mar 11, 2009, at 8:43 AM, someguy wrote:
> If we get the blessing of one of the old-timers who is willing to
> spend a little time reviewing postings, we can deal with the
> 'misleading information' issue.
I don't consider the possibility of "misleading" information to be
a
big worry.  It is no worse than having out of date "official" docs.

Ideally, useful sections of the wiki will periodically be merged back  
into the main docs.

-Chris

Except that official docs are written by people who really know what  
they are doing ("experts") whereas the whole point of this Wiki is for
any user to contribute tips.  Still, I'm happy to give it a try.

One procedural concern is how we can authenticate Wiki contributors  
since I've been told UI prohibits hosting Wiki pages with anonymous  
content (which is understandable).  We will get back to you all on  
that.  Unless of course someone else wants to volunteer to set one up.

--Vikram
Associate Professor, Computer Science
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
http://llvm.org/~vadve



On Mar 11, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2009, at 8:43 AM, someguy wrote:
>> If we get the blessing of one of the old-timers who is willing to
>> spend a little time reviewing postings, we can deal with the
>> 'misleading information' issue.
>
> I don't consider the possibility of "misleading" information
to be a
> big worry.  It is no worse than having out of date "official"
docs.
>
> Ideally, useful sections of the wiki will periodically be merged back
> into the main docs.
>
> -Chris
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev