Re: Loop unroll fixes

[David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>]

>>>>> Jim Wilson writes:

Jim> Another offensive comment.  My approach is easy to understand, it is a simple
Jim> application of negative reinforcement.  If someone uses threats against me,
Jim> then I will delay cooperating with them.  The more I am threated, the more
Jim> I will delay.  Eventually, I expect people will learn that threats are
Jim> counterproductive, and stop using them.  I am willing to accept the risk
Jim> that this approach will occasionally backfire.  I will not accept the claim
Jim> that this approach is wrong.  After all, I am a volunteer, and I reserve the
Jim> right to decide what I do with the time that I have volunteered to spend on
Jim> gcc.

	Jim, you have ever right to determine how you expend your
volunteer effort.

	Please keep in mind that your messages state your opinion of the
events, not some objective facts.  I only can express my view of the
events as well.  If you want to reprimand and punish me based on your
interpretation, fine.  Please do not imply that your opinion is more
correct than that of anyone else.  None of us has any sort of special
privilege or insight to decree what is right or what is wrong or what is
sufficient evidence or what policy is appropriate.

	Have you considered that your messages on this thread could be
interpreted as condescending and elicit responses which you would find
offensive?  You are speaking with people who disagree with you, not
training people who are inferior to you.  I respect your opinion, although
I think you developed your conclusions before investigating all of the
information.

	The intent of my original message was to notify everyone that I
was not going to allow the bottleneck on this patch to continue.  I did
not intend for anyone to immediately review the patch or generate
alternate fixes for bugs highlighted by the patch.  I simply did not want
things to remain in limbo.  Zoltan and I always have been ready to address
any concerns about or omissions in the patch, but that requires feedback.

Thanks, David