[llvm-dev] RFC: changing variable naming rules in LLVM codebase

[Michael Platings via llvm-dev]

> It seems a bit early to discuss conversion given there’s not consensus on a style.

My reason for pushing the conversion conversation is that if it's decided that we want to clang-tidy everything then we have much more leeway in which style we use. If we allow conversion to happen organically, then for that to work we need to take into account the current style coexisting with the new style, whatever that may be.

My fear is that if we insist on a big-bang transition then there will be sufficient opposition that we end up making no change at all. For that reason I favour allowing conversion to happen organically.

> This comment seems to assume that camelBack is the agreed upon style and all we need to do now is move forward

No, I don't believe it's agreed upon, sorry to give that impression. I see strong views on both sides. I just picked one for arguments sake.