Re: [PATCH 0/3 v5] Demangler crash handler

[Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>]

> From: Tom Tromey <tromey@redhat.com>
> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:41:30 -0600
> 
> >>>>> "Gary" == Gary Benson <gbenson@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> Gary> This series is an updated version of the demangler crash handler I
> Gary> posted last week.
> 
> Thanks, Gary.
> 
> I re-read the various discussions and my belief is that you've addressed
> all the comments.  I believe Mark has proposed a compromise which you
> implemented, and I believe Stan's objections were contingent on Mark's.
> 
> This patch has been unusually contentious.  So I'd give folks yet
> another opportunity to express their disapprovals; let's say another
> week.
> 
> Disapprovals, I believe, must be accompanied by technical reasons for a
> rejection.  Gary has already addressed most such arguments, so if you
> are responding, please make sure to read the previous threads.

My position still is that this is duct tape being applied because of
extremely bad engineering practices.  Don't expect me to approve the
compromise.  I still think the whole excercise was a tremendous waste
of time.  In fact I feel a little bit blackmailed because Gary kept on
putting work into this diff.  But I'll shut up now.