[llvm] r179601 - Cleanup naming: DataLayout s/TD/DL/

[Eric Christopher]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote:
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com>
> Date: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 3:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [llvm] r179601 - Cleanup naming: DataLayout s/TD/DL/
> To: Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Apr 16, 2013, at 2:32 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> DL and dl often are used for debugloc elsewhere. Thoughts on
>>> alternatives?
>>
>>
>> Good point. I don't think there should be a lot of places where there's a
>> conflict between the two, and wherever it is, the conflict can be resolved
>> by using longer an more meaningful names. I'm not sure it's the only place
>> in LLVM code where there's such a conflict...
>>
>> Eli
>>
>> Sounds reasonable. Just something that caught my eye. Thanks!
>>
>
>
> Rats... a lot of work has to be done to make it consistent:
>
> $ git grep "\bTD\b" | grep "\.cpp"|wc -l
> 1766
> $ git grep "\bDL\b" | grep "\.cpp"|wc -l
> 2705
>
> And there are a number of places where both are used (FastIsel and its
> target subclasses, for instance).
>
> DL makes more sense for DataLayout because it's most similar to other
> "information classes", i.e:
>
>   const TargetMachine &TM;
>   const DataLayout &TD;               <------------ DL
>   const TargetInstrInfo &TII;
>   const TargetLowering &TLI;
>   const TargetRegisterInfo &TRI;
>
> So DebugLoc probably has to cede its throne and be converted to DbgLoc or
> something similar? Again, that's ~4.5K substitutions to make in order to be
> completely consistent :-(
>

I think the one with more uses gets to stay? ;)

-eric