[PATCH] D48857: Also search BitcodeFiles for exclude-lib symbols

[Rui Ueyama via llvm-commits]

It may make sense to get a consensus and update the coding standard
document, as it is not entirely clear. If that's the case, I'd vote for
CamelCase. :)

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:46 PM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith via Phabricator <
reviews at reviews.llvm.org> wrote:

> dexonsmith added a comment.
>
> In https://reviews.llvm.org/D48857#1153575, @ruiu wrote:
>
> > Is that part of our coding standard? In lld, all local variables holding
> >  function-like objects are in CamelCase, not in camelCase.
>
>
> Last I checked the coding standard did not call out local variables that
> are function-like specifically.  I've seen them both ways in LLVM, and I
> prefer aligning them with other functions than with local variables.
>
> If lld is entirely consistent don't let me get in the way.
>
>
> Repository:
>   rLLD LLVM Linker
>
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D48857
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20180705/078b369f/attachment.html>