One additional consideration is that LLDB currently uses underscore_names. It might be worth considering that style on these grounds alone, as that would bring a very large existing part of LLVM into conformance<br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 1:47 PM David Greene via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">It very much depends on what is following the code snippit. If the<br>
second "if" is guarding a substantial block of code, "constantExpr"<br>
might very well be a good name. Otherwise something like "cExpr" or<br>
"constExpr" might be fine.<br>
<br>
In the past when I have seen things like "CE" in the code, it's not<br>
always immediately clear to me what it is. I have to go find the<br>
declaration.<br>
<br>
-David<br>
<br>
<br>
Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> writes:<br>
<br>
> The reason is clear: the variable name in such a context doesn't add<br>
> anything, since it's obvious what it is. Long names should be used<br>
> where meaning needs to be conveyed, otherwise they just obfuscate the<br>
> code needlessly.<br>
><br>
> -Krzysztof<br>
><br>
> On 2/12/2019 3:17 PM, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev wrote:<br>
>> I would assume that the proper name in this case is constantExpr, and not CE.<br>
>> This is not really an acronym, but rather a shortcut taken for some unclear reason.<br>
>><br>
>>> On 12. Feb 2019, at 13:02, Björn Pettersson A via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> (Sorry if this subject already has been discussed, but I could not find any clear rules/recommendations.)<br>
>>> What would the recommendation be for acronyms (I’ve seen the rule<br>
>>> about avoiding them unless they are “well known”,<br>
>>> but sometimes an acronym is useful, and we at least need to have some recommendation for the “well known” ones).<br>
>>> Example:<br>
>>> if (ConstantExpr *CE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(V))<br>
>>> if (CE->getOpcode() == Instruction::GetElementPtr &&<br>
>>> CE->getOperand(0)->isNullValue()) {<br>
>>> In the above example, is the recommendation to use “ce” instead<br>
>>> of “CE” now? Or should it be “cE”?<br>
>>> With lowerCamelCase one might think that “cE” is the correct one (although I personally think that one looks quite ugly).<br>
>>> Maybe there should be an exception that variable names that start<br>
>>> with an acronym still should start with an upper case letter?<br>
>>> /Björn<br>
>>> From: llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org</a>> On Behalf Of<br>
>>> Michael Platings via llvm-dev<br>
>>> Sent: den 7 februari 2019 23:11<br>
>>> To: <a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
>>> Cc: nd <<a href="mailto:nd@arm.com" target="_blank">nd@arm.com</a>><br>
>>> Subject: [llvm-dev] RFC: changing variable naming rules in LLVM codebase<br>
>>> TL;DR: change the rule for variable names from UpperCamelCase to<br>
>>> lowerCamelCase.<br>
>>><br>
>>> <br>
>>><br>
>>> Just to get wider visibility on this, I'm raising this again as an RFC, as suggested by Roman Lebedev.<br>
>>><br>
>>> <br>
>>><br>
>>> My original post from last week is here and gives a rationale: <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-February/129854.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-February/129854.html</a>. There seemed to be general agreement that the status quo is not ideal.<br>
>>><br>
>>> <br>
>>><br>
>>> Chris Lattner pointed out that this came up in 2014 as well: <a href="http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2014-October/077685.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2014-October/077685.html</a>>><br>
>>> <br>
>>><br>
>>> I've created a patch to implement the change. Review and comments welcome: <a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D57896" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://reviews.llvm.org/D57896</a>>><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a>><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>