Stream: t-compiler

Topic: #54818 weekly meeting 2018-10-25


pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 13:13, on Zulip):

just a quick heads up to @T-compiler members: we'll be having our weekly meeting here in about 45 minutes.

Wesley Wiser (Oct 25 2018 at 13:49, on Zulip):

I might be away for part of it but I should be able to catch most of it

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:00, on Zulip):

ho ho, I almost missed the start myself!

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:00, on Zulip):

hi everyone (namely @T-compiler !)

mw (Oct 25 2018 at 14:00, on Zulip):

o/

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:01, on Zulip):

so today might be interesting; from my earlier skim over the agenda items, it looks like we might be able to get through the boilerplate stuff relatively quickly today!

Vadim Petrochenkov (Oct 25 2018 at 14:01, on Zulip):

hi

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:01, on Zulip):

example: only one P-high item today, namely #55094

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:02, on Zulip):

Hey there @Vadim Petrochenkov , great to have you here!

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:02, on Zulip):

especially since you might be able to clarify my understanding of the state of #55094 "Weird filesystem hierarchy with nested modules"

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 14:02, on Zulip):

looks like we're backing out that feature (according to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/55192#issuecomment-432059195)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:03, on Zulip):

so that's fine; but the dialogue on PR #55192 made it seem like we were backing it out due to the looming Wednesday deadline

Vadim Petrochenkov (Oct 25 2018 at 14:03, on Zulip):

Yep, unstabilized on 1.30 stable, needs crater to decide what to do next.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:03, on Zulip):

except my understanding is that we've delayed by a like a week? Is that incorrect?

Taylor Cramer (Oct 25 2018 at 14:04, on Zulip):

Oh geeze this mess

Pietro Albini (Oct 25 2018 at 14:04, on Zulip):

@Vadim Petrochenkov you can probably start another run (sorry about the broken one!)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:04, on Zulip):

anyway, it sounds like #55094 is being dealt with, one way or another

Pietro Albini (Oct 25 2018 at 14:05, on Zulip):

and 1.30 is happening today (in a few hours), with that feature unstabilized

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:05, on Zulip):

I just wanted to note here that I made a comment on #55094 essentially saying "the feature has been unstabilized", and if there's anything I got wrong there, feel free to correct it.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:06, on Zulip):

@Pietro Albini okay, so the 1.30 that's happening today is the stable release. Its the nightly->beta cut that has been delayed by a week, then?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:07, on Zulip):

(I see now, I misunderstood how far down the pipeline the regression described in #55094 had leaked. okay.)

Pietro Albini (Oct 25 2018 at 14:07, on Zulip):

I don't think so, but don't take my word for it

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:07, on Zulip):

Oh, the nightly->beta cut is not delayed?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:07, on Zulip):

let me go find what comment made me think this

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:07, on Zulip):

I believe that @simulacrum said something about delaying till Monday over in #wg-nll

Pietro Albini (Oct 25 2018 at 14:07, on Zulip):

the blog post says RC2 will be released on monday

Vadim Petrochenkov (Oct 25 2018 at 14:08, on Zulip):

Beta/nightly promotion is what I think matters here and that'll happen early next week
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/55297#issuecomment-432482537

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:08, on Zulip):

okay and I saw this comment from @simulacrum over on PR #55297

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:08, on Zulip):

(what @Vadim Petrochenkov said)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:09, on Zulip):

This is all fine, from what I can tell, Just good for everyone to be aware of.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:09, on Zulip):

So it looks like #55094 is under control. Lets move along to next agenda item then.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:09, on Zulip):

RC2 milestone issues

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:10, on Zulip):

there are two. First is "[WIP] Partial implementation of uniform paths 2.0 to land before beta" #55297

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:10, on Zulip):

and @Vadim Petrochenkov reported there that work there will continue

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:11, on Zulip):

second is "Keep resolved defs in path prefixes and emit them in save-analysis" #54145

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:11, on Zulip):

which looks like its in the process of being massaged into landing

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:12, on Zulip):

looking good indeed

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:12, on Zulip):

(merge conflicts, but I assume ... hmm, no @nrc on zulip?)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:12, on Zulip):

:sad:

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:12, on Zulip):

well I assume nick will take care of it.

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:13, on Zulip):

pretty sure, yes

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:13, on Zulip):

they mentioned to me how badly they wanted this PR to land :P

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:13, on Zulip):

next up: beta-nominations. Empty list!

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:13, on Zulip):

next up: stable-nominations: Empty list!

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:13, on Zulip):

next: stable-to-beta regressions

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:14, on Zulip):

we already discussed #55094

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:14, on Zulip):

#54709 is in FCP with disposition-close

Pietro Albini (Oct 25 2018 at 14:14, on Zulip):

I guess we could early-close it, with the release a few hours away

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:15, on Zulip):

#54627 was discussed last week, with workarounds documented and us stating that we do not plan to have a fix in time for release.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:16, on Zulip):

I guess #54627 will be recategorized as stable-to-stable regression after the release, and it will join its compatriots there.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:17, on Zulip):

and the last of the stable-to-beta regressions: "[1.30 beta] Test suite of the jemalloc-ctl crate is failing" #54478 is actually fixed. Its just open because it needed a test, and there's a PR for that in the queue.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:17, on Zulip):

next agenda item: stable-to-nightly regressions

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:18, on Zulip):

"NLL: cast causes failure to promote to static" #55288 is being worked on actively

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:18, on Zulip):

"Unsized extern statics no longer compile" #55239 has a PR which is enqueued to be merged in a rollup

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:19, on Zulip):

"ICE 'allocation missing in dead_alloc_map' in rustc_mir::interpret when compiling Servo" #55223 has been forked off into two more specific issues, namely #55287 and #55288

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:20, on Zulip):

(we just mentioned #55288.) As for #55287 ... ah, I see, @Oli removed the stable-to-nightly regression tag there, due to a lack of an example

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 14:21, on Zulip):

should we close the unspecific original issue then?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:21, on Zulip):

(and in any case, #55287 will be fixed by PR #55262)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:21, on Zulip):

@Oli as in, close #55223 as a duplicate of #55288 ?

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 14:21, on Zulip):

yea

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:22, on Zulip):

I don't have a problem with that.

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 14:22, on Zulip):

done

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:23, on Zulip):

next: "ICE when accessing an associated constant of a generic impl" #55219 ... will be fixed by PR #55323

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:23, on Zulip):

and "Rustc panics on nightly with crate interpolate" #54654 ... I tried to reproduce this and could not. I'm waiting to see if we get more info from Boscop

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:24, on Zulip):

having said that: This user is on windows-msvc

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:24, on Zulip):

is there any reason why one might be more likely to see an ICE about "proc-macro crate not dylib" on that platform?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:25, on Zulip):

well anyway that's all the stable-to-nightly regressions

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:25, on Zulip):

/me is so jazzed about getting this far into the agenda after only 25 minutes

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:25, on Zulip):

Next agenda item: waiting for our team

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:26, on Zulip):

only one issue here: "Support for the program data address space option of LLVM's Target Datalayout" #54993

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:26, on Zulip):

there's sort of active discussion going on there

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:27, on Zulip):

but it sounds like the main question is what to do with this given that there is also PR #51576: "Make librustc_codegen_llvm aware of LLVM address spaces."

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:27, on Zulip):

(seems like it's "in hand" though I do wonder if this is one of those cases that might merit an RFC or something.)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:28, on Zulip):

I'm thinking in particular of this comment from the author of PR #54993:

I see two ways forward:

1) close this for now until a decision on #51576 is reached.
2) merge this for now (after addressing your comments) and refactor / upgrade things in #51576.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:29, on Zulip):

Can someone answer that question for @Tim Neumann ? Who would be best to take point there?

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:29, on Zulip):

One thing that I'm confused about is the intended purpose and scope of these changes

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:30, on Zulip):

I guess I have to re-read the PRs, probably the information I want is in there

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:30, on Zulip):

(in particular, does this affect the language in any way? etc — that all still feels a bit murky to me)

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:30, on Zulip):

anyway, that doesn't answer your question, I don't really know the answer to that exactly

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:31, on Zulip):

It seems to me like either @nikomatsakis or @eddyb is the best person to take charge on answering @Tim Neumann 's question

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:31, on Zulip):

I can do that, I'll put a to-do item to bottom this out

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:31, on Zulip):

great

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:31, on Zulip):

okay, 29 minutes left and we've gotten to the I-nominated list

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:32, on Zulip):

first: "path suggestions in Rust 2018 should point out the change in semantics" #55130

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:32, on Zulip):

I think this actually has a PR in flight?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:32, on Zulip):

so I'm going to remove the nominated tag. I should have done that earler.

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:33, on Zulip):

(yes, it does)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:33, on Zulip):

we just discussed #54993, so I'll skip that

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:34, on Zulip):

next: "What should we guarantee regarding "sort-of unused" extern statics" #54388

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:34, on Zulip):

boy I nominated this a while ago

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:34, on Zulip):

oh right and we even discussed it

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:34, on Zulip):

(for five minutes)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:35, on Zulip):

No one has added any more comments since then. I'm inclined to say that we've decided that the compiler's behavior here is "not buggy" and that the test should be revised to not try to exercise this.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:36, on Zulip):

assigning to self to do such revision of the test.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:36, on Zulip):

next: "run-pass/extern-pass-empty is probably a bogus thing to test" #53859

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:37, on Zulip):

boy I nominated this a while ago

#53859 is what I was thinking of when I said this

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:37, on Zulip):

We should not be pretending that #[repr(C)] struct Empty works in our test suite, right?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:38, on Zulip):

My memory is that it issues a future-proofing warning

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:38, on Zulip):

no i'm wrong, hmm

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:39, on Zulip):

what the heck, I thought we had a lint about this when I filed this issue

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:39, on Zulip):

funnily enough, we were just discussing this case in the UCG PR on structs and tuples

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:39, on Zulip):

(that is, #[repr(C)] attached to an empty struct)

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:39, on Zulip):

which is sort of a contradiction

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:40, on Zulip):

since C has no such thing

Wesley Wiser (Oct 25 2018 at 14:40, on Zulip):

#[repr(C)] on a zst doesn't make any sense to me but I'm probably missing something

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:40, on Zulip):

no I dont think @Wesley Wiser is missing anything

mw (Oct 25 2018 at 14:40, on Zulip):

it seems harmless though

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 14:40, on Zulip):

should we just turn the issue into an issue about making this case warn?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:40, on Zulip):

support for them was added in "rustc: Fix x86 ffi for struct arguments" #12762

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:40, on Zulip):

but I still cannot tell why

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:41, on Zulip):

maybe because we didn't have extern type at that time?

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:41, on Zulip):

(I think the consensus of UCG team was that we ought to lint about #[repr(C)] attached to a struct of zero-size, since it is misleading at best)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:41, on Zulip):

that is, weren't empty structs as some time used as a placeholder for extern type? Or am I misremembering?

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:41, on Zulip):

(see here for more discussion)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:41, on Zulip):

okay graet

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:41, on Zulip):

I will link to that discussion from the issue

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:41, on Zulip):

we don't need to talk more about it here in that case

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:42, on Zulip):

(also note that gcc and clang have extensions to permit zero-sized structs in C)

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:42, on Zulip):

(tl;dr it's all weird and complex)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:42, on Zulip):

(also note that gcc and clang have extensions to permit zero-sized structs in C)

ah thats important to know

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:42, on Zulip):

might be motivation to actually support it in that case

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:42, on Zulip):

okay

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:42, on Zulip):

I'll read over the discussion of the UCG

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:42, on Zulip):

next up: "Report const eval error inside the query" #53821

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 14:43, on Zulip):

uh that just got FCP finished

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 14:43, on Zulip):

I'll rebase and... r=reviewer I guess?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:43, on Zulip):

I'll kill the nominated tag there

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:44, on Zulip):

next: "Rustc does not warn about use with paths incompatible with uniform_paths for edition 2018" #53797

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:45, on Zulip):

we discussed this last week (at least accordinng to my own entry in the comments ...) lets see

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:45, on Zulip):

looks like its being handled or at least triaged

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:45, on Zulip):

I'm going to remove the nomination tag

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:45, on Zulip):

next: "[Rust 2018] rustdoc doesn't link "pub use whatever_crate;"" #52509

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:47, on Zulip):

I'm trying to interpret imperio's comment

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:47, on Zulip):

I take it that we do have ... a link to rand ... but its being categorized as a module?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:47, on Zulip):

I guess if I really want to understand what's happening I should reproduce locally

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:48, on Zulip):

anyway it sounds like imperio might be implicitly asking for assistance with how to make more progress.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:48, on Zulip):

or maybe even wants someone else to take over on it?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:48, on Zulip):

e.g. :

If I haven't finish this week-end, then please please ask someone else.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:49, on Zulip):

You know what, let me take this. imperio and I are in the same timezone and we know each other.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:49, on Zulip):

(dropping nomination tag from #52509)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:50, on Zulip):

getting to really old nominatinos now...

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:50, on Zulip):

"Binaries compiled on Raspberry Pi with arm-unknown-linux-musleabihf fail on the same device" #51112

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:50, on Zulip):

anyone have a R.Pi who'd like to look at this?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:50, on Zulip):

its (obviously?) low priority

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:51, on Zulip):

in fact I'm going to remove the nominatino tag and mark it as P-medium

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:51, on Zulip):

sounds good

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:52, on Zulip):

next: "Rust 1.26.0 fails to build on OS X 10.10.5" #50776

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:52, on Zulip):

hmm. this might be homebrew specific?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:52, on Zulip):

I'll assign myself and try to take a look

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:52, on Zulip):

but it seems P-medium to me

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:53, on Zulip):

pretty old OS X version. Even I'm using something newer. :P

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:53, on Zulip):

seems not high priority unless it's affecting many users

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:53, on Zulip):

oh that's a good point

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:53, on Zulip):

I didn't pay enough attentino to which OS X i twas

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:53, on Zulip):

well we should verify whether it affects newer things I guess

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:54, on Zulip):

actually, I'll mark as P-high for now

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:54, on Zulip):

P-medium once I doulbe-check circumstances

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:54, on Zulip):

i.e. if its homebrew specific

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:54, on Zulip):

or old OS X specific

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:54, on Zulip):

or a combinatino of the two

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:55, on Zulip):

last

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:56, on Zulip):

"Missed optimization: references from pointers aren't treated as noalias" #38941

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:57, on Zulip):

so the main thing here seems to be this final comment from @eddyb :

Nominated for compiler team discussion - how should we track these instances of #16515?
I edited its description to reflect the current status, but can we do something more organized?
Do we want to close and open a new tracking issue?
(prompted by @shepmaster in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/38941#issuecomment-423776089)

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:58, on Zulip):

hmm

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:58, on Zulip):

I'm going to at least copy over the labels from #16515 to #38941

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:58, on Zulip):

in general, we do not have a good mechanism for tracking the performance of our generated code, full stop.

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 14:58, on Zulip):

I'd love to see the perf server (or some other server) extended for this case; anp was working on that

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:58, on Zulip):

(i'm adding the WG-codegen labels to these two issues as well)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:59, on Zulip):

I say we keep this particular issue open for now but make it clear that it falls under the general purvue of #16515 ...?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 14:59, on Zulip):

beyond that, maybe we want to make an actual Project for codegen and/or LLVM-usage improvements?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:00, on Zulip):

/me has been experimenting with the Project interface for NLL stuff

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:00, on Zulip):

I'll make a comment saying as much.

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:00, on Zulip):

Hmm. I'm skeptical, but maybe

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:00, on Zulip):

I've found the project interface largely not to scale but maybe I've not been using it right

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:00, on Zulip):

or have been using it for the wrong things

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:00, on Zulip):

Oh I'm not saying I love it

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:01, on Zulip):

I've been pretty unhappy with aspects. I.e. how much I have to use the mouse

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:01, on Zulip):

but compared to editting the huge text body of an issue description ... it's an improvement. I think.

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:03, on Zulip):

ok

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:03, on Zulip):

I can believe that :)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:03, on Zulip):

(the context here was the list of .nll.stderr differences)

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:04, on Zulip):

A list of 460 files

nagisa (Oct 25 2018 at 15:04, on Zulip):

/me chimes in to say that they will take over https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/53514 and submit a replacement this weekend

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:04, on Zulip):

I haven't figured out whether a project card-per-file is insanity or a net win

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:04, on Zulip):

btw

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:04, on Zulip):

we should discuss DST for next meeting

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:04, on Zulip):

but its what I'm trying right now, see: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/projects/10

nagisa (Oct 25 2018 at 15:04, on Zulip):

Daylight saving time or dynamic sized types :P

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:04, on Zulip):

usually I have selfishly anchored the time to boston

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:05, on Zulip):

Daylight savings time :) apparently we drift out of sync, I think, next week?

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:05, on Zulip):

holy cow @nikomatsakis did mean Daylight Savings

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:05, on Zulip):

yeah we drift, EU and USA are out of sync

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:05, on Zulip):

not the first time those acronyms have been confused for one another

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:05, on Zulip):

but only for a week or something? maybe two?

varkor (Oct 25 2018 at 15:05, on Zulip):

it makes the most sense just to keep a consistent UTC time

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:05, on Zulip):

not to me :P

nagisa (Oct 25 2018 at 15:05, on Zulip):

Yeah, we always anchored to Boston time, I think it is fine to keep doing that.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

I'm flexible, I think. That is, I believe I can keep doing Boston time.

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

fine by me

varkor (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

as long as my calendar reflects the correct time, I can make either time

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

but I'm ok either way, I think, though it affects what the UCG team does =)

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

I think that is how the calendar invite is created

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

so if we do nothing else, it will stay that way

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

actually

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

the other issue is that

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

my wife is pregnant with twins

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

oh you all may not know this

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

and the due date is coming up soon

varkor (Oct 25 2018 at 15:06, on Zulip):

I don't think I'm on that calendar, so maybe you could send me a link @nikomatsakis?

oli (Oct 25 2018 at 15:07, on Zulip):

congrats!

nagisa (Oct 25 2018 at 15:07, on Zulip):

We can revisit this next year when EU disables DST altogether :P

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:07, on Zulip):

so even though I might be fine with the timing

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:07, on Zulip):

we still might need someone else to run the meeting

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:07, on Zulip):

on short notice. :)

nagisa (Oct 25 2018 at 15:07, on Zulip):

@pnkfelix I’ve ran a few meetings in the past, I could do this again if magical things start happening

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:07, on Zulip):

okay thanks @nagisa

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:08, on Zulip):

the biggest piece of advice I can offer: It is amazingly useful to do a prepass over the agenda before the meeting.

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:08, on Zulip):

(that's probably something obvious to many of you. but its helped me a lot, I think, in terms of how smoothly these have gone recently.)

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:09, on Zulip):

@varkor send me your e-mail and I'll add you — should find a way to make it a public thing

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:09, on Zulip):

one other thing — tomorrow is compiler steering meeting, same time, same place

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:09, on Zulip):

if you've not filled out the survey, please do so

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:09, on Zulip):

So are we agreed to stay anchored to Boston time mostly, yeah?

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:10, on Zulip):

later today I'll make some kind of summary of survey results, I guess? I didn't explicitly say that they would be made public, though I don't imagine it'd be too bad if they were (though I've not read all the responses :)

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:10, on Zulip):

anyway more on that later

pnkfelix (Oct 25 2018 at 15:10, on Zulip):

Okay. Great meeting everyone! Its good to get through all the agenda items, makes me feel good about the steering meeting tomorrow.

nagisa (Oct 25 2018 at 15:10, on Zulip):

I’ll probably won’t be able to make meeting time tmrw, bringing my dog to a vet half an hour before, although the visit is expected to be short.

nikomatsakis (Oct 25 2018 at 15:10, on Zulip):

/me has to run to be get home, ttyal

Last update: Nov 16 2019 at 01:35UTC