[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] draft rule for naming types/functions/variables

[John McCall]

On Nov 30, 2010, at 11:29 PM, Zhanyong Wan (λx.x x) wrote:

> Hi Chris,
> 
> I've uploaded a new patch to http://codereview.appspot.com/3264041.
> It's also attached to this message.
> 
> I think I've addressed all your comments, except "when in doubt, an
> enum should be a 'Kind'".  I don't think I fully understand that
> point, and it strikes me as a bit ad hoc for the coding standards.  Do
> we really want it?
> 
> If you feel that's important, I'll add it -- but it will need some
> clarification, as the Kind suffix clearly doesn't fit all enums.  What
> is it that you really have in mind?

I think Chris means that if you're going to have a type that enumerates all the different kinds of Blah, it should be called something like BlahKind.  Seems like a good rule to me;  we have several competing conventions right now (e.g. clang::CastKind, clang::Type::TypeClass, and llvm::GlobalValue::LinkageTypes), and I do find myself having to look up these names a fair amount.

Enums for which "Kind" isn't an appropriate suffix shouldn't be suffixed with "Kind".  I think there's a general principle somewhere in there. :)

John.