[OT] LLVM Community Code of Conduct

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 21 October 2015 at 08:06:34 UTC, Johannes Pfau 
wrote:
> It might make sense to reconsider upstreaming our inline ASM 
> code. I think the main reason we didn't do that yet was that 
> the druntime developers think of druntime as a compiler 
> specific library anyway. And then there's no use in having GDC 
> specific ASM in a DMD specific druntime.

Even if gdc-specific stuff doesn't go into druntime, I would 
think that it would make sense to update druntime where 
appropriate to segregate the stuff that's compiler-specific so 
that it's easy for the gdc and ldc teams to replace the parts 
that they need to replace. That being said, I would think that 
using version blocks to separate compiler-specific stuff would 
have been appropriate and that ideally the gdc and ldc teams 
wouldn't have their own versions of druntime or Phobos, but even 
then, modularizing that stuff is likely to be more maintainable 
than having it scattered throughout the code.

- Jonathan M Davis