[llvm-commits] [llvm] r164173 - in /llvm/trunk: include/llvm/Transforms/Utils/IntegerDivision.h lib/Transforms/Utils/CMakeLists.txt lib/Transforms/Utils/IntegerDivision.cpp

[Chandler Carruth]

On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 6:37 PM, Michael Ilseman <milseman at apple.com> wrote:

> Andy was referring to my patch to SimplifyCFG from a couple weeks ago.
> This commit is a brand new file, and r164238 renamed the functions to
> conform to the coding standards.
>

Doh! =] I had seen your patch, and was confused as to why this came back up
-- this makes more sense. Too little context in this thread, sorry!


>
> On Sep 19, 2012, at 6:34 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>
> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Andrew Trick <atrick at apple.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sep 19, 2012, at 5:48 PM, Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > Could you elaborate on this old-style vs new-style thing? Also, a bit
>> > more explanation in the coding standards is probably in order ("older
>> > code uses names like ... but the expectation for new code (except
>> > where incongruous) is ...".
>>
>>
>> I think the Coding Standards already explain the situation well:
>>
>> http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#introduction
>>
>> Michael is working on a file where the function name were still
>> capitalized.
>
>
> Er, no, he is adding a brand new file.
>
> Whether the file existed out-of-tree in some other form shouldn't be
> relevant here. New code in the LLVM tree is what is held to the coding
> standards, and this is all new code.
>  _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20120919/b3064e2f/attachment.html>