llvm dev - Jun 2017 - the root cause is copy propagation of undef

John,
         I can see that you are upset, but this is because you have
taken offense when none was intended, which is a sure-fire way
to spoil any email conversation.

And it also seems you are upset not because I am not listening,
rather because I have been listening and have successfully
counter-argued what people have been saying.

I am challenging you to question your assumptions, sometimes
this is a difficult process, both mentally and emotionally.

I imagine you to be an intelligent person with integrity and I value
your participation in this discussion, please consider rejoining.

Peter Lawrence.



> On Jun 20, 2017, at 10:14 AM, via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> 
> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 08:35:41 -0600
> From: John Regehr via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
> To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] the root cause is CP, was: A tagged
> 	architecture, the elephant in the undef / poison room
> Message-ID: <b82c864f-dfe9-79c6-c2f1-66b57acd572d at cs.utah.edu
<mailto:b82c864f-dfe9-79c6-c2f1-66b57acd572d at cs.utah.edu>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
> 
> Peter, you mischaracterized what I said, you mischaracterized (below) 
> what Nuno said, and you don't appear to be listening to anything people
> are saying.
> 
> I'll request (yet again) that you tone it down -- we're trying to
make
> progress on some real problems with LLVM's undefined behavior model and
> you are hurting the conversation, not helping it.
> 
> Regardless, I'm done arguing with you.
> 
> John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170626/a085a4ba/attachment.html>

Peter, several people reached out to me because this discussion is no
longer really proceeding in a way that is reasonable on LLVM's lists.

John asked you to tone down your approach in these discussions. You haven't
done so and have reiterated your strong tone. Please don't continue to
reiterate your position on the list.

If you want to have a meta-discussion about how to approach this discussion
reasonably going forward, feel free to reach out to me privately, and I'll
be happy to talk to you, but I don't think an email list as large as
'llvm-dev' is the right forum.

Also, please refrain from editing subject (or truncating it, etc) as that
forks the thread in some email clients and makes it very hard to follow
discussions and also very hard for those *not* participating to skip the
thread and participate in other threads.

Thanks,
-Chandler

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 7:50 AM Peter Lawrence via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> John,
>          I can see that you are upset, but this is because you have
> taken offense when none was intended, which is a sure-fire way
> to spoil any email conversation.
>
> And it also seems you are upset not because I am not listening,
> rather because I have been listening and have successfully
> counter-argued what people have been saying.
>
> I am challenging you to question your assumptions, sometimes
> this is a difficult process, both mentally and emotionally.
>
> I imagine you to be an intelligent person with integrity and I value
> your participation in this discussion, please consider rejoining.
>
> Peter Lawrence.
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 20, 2017, at 10:14 AM, via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org>
> wrote:
>
> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 08:35:41 -0600
> From: John Regehr via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] the root cause is CP, was: A tagged
> architecture, the elephant in the undef / poison room
> Message-ID: <b82c864f-dfe9-79c6-c2f1-66b57acd572d at cs.utah.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>
> Peter, you mischaracterized what I said, you mischaracterized (below)
> what Nuno said, and you don't appear to be listening to anything people
> are saying.
>
> I'll request (yet again) that you tone it down -- we're trying to
make
> progress on some real problems with LLVM's undefined behavior model and
> you are hurting the conversation, not helping it.
>
> Regardless, I'm done arguing with you.
>
> John
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20170627/16363aa7/attachment-0001.html>