r176428 - Perform non-overload placeholder conversions on the operands

[Manuel Klimek]

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Richard Smith <richard at metafoo.co.uk> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 5:39 PM, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mar 8, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 5:07 PM, John McCall <rjmccall at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, I must have.
>>>
>>> Several more of your recent commits have converted variables from the
>>> InitialCaps style required by the coding standard to an initialLowercase
>>> form.
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, did that get formalized?  That's unfortunate for quite a few
>>> reasons.  Maybe LLVM is consistent about it, but Clang's code base is
>>> pretty far from that, particularly in IR-gen.
>>>
>>
>> It did, and it is much more consistent in LLVM and other parts of Clang.
>> Not really endorsing it, but I figure we should all suffer through it or
>> get Chris to change it. ;]
>>
>>
>> How's that reformatting tool coming along? :)
>>
>
> I believe a tool to "fix" variable capitalization already exists, maybe
> Manuel can confirm that?
>

Nope, it doesn't. But if Chris ever changes his opinion on churn (assuming
we already all agree that that's the limiting factor), I will gladly hack
one up in a day :P


>
> I mean, there's also mass inconsistency in LLVM and Clang about
>> capitalization of methods.  Or rather, there isn't:  I would estimate that
>> LLVM and Clang are ~90% consistent with a convention of capitalizing the
>> first letter in a method name, and (1) that also contradicts the style
>> guide and (2) it actually *matters* because everybody using that method has
>> to be aware of it.
>>
>
> [... some quick-and-dirty regexps later...]
>
> In include/llvm: 6275 methods starting [a-z], 1491 methods starting [A-Z]
> In include/clang: 5176 methods starting [a-z], 2884 methods starting [A-Z]
>
> So it looks like we're more consistent with the coding standard than with
> the opposite convention in our public interfaces. In headers in clang's
> lib/, we're somewhat the other way around: 438 starting [a-z], 669 starting
> [A-Z], and specifically in clang's lib/CodeGen, we have 244 [a-z], 345
> [A-Z].
>
> These numbers aren't entirely accurate, since they don't cover the vast
> numbers of Visit*, Traverse*, and Transform* functions we generate with
> xmacros.
>
>
>> It seems clear to me that we're going to have a red letter day sooner or
>> later where we rename a bunch of LLVM APIs, and if we do that, we should
>> also change the local variable convention to something that LLVM
>> contributors don't essentially universally dislike.
>>
>
> Yes, I agree. I vaguely recall being told that the sticking point on this
> in the past was a worry about it degrading the usefulness of tools like
> 'svn annotate'. If we're no longer concerned about that, perhaps it's time
> to fix this once and for all.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20130310/fbced53f/attachment.html>