[PATCH] D114025: [clang][NFC] Inclusive terms: replace some uses of sanity in clang

Thu Nov 18 07:37:10 PST 2021

aaron.ballman added a comment.

In D114025#3140161 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114025#3140161>, @martong wrote:

> Do we have a comprehensive list of non-inclusive terms and their inclusive correspondent somewhere available?
> I mean `master` -> `main`, `white list` -> `inclusive list`, `sanity` -> `validation`, ...
> I'd assume that we go through that list, and that could give me a clue of how many such patches to expect in the future.
>
> Also, I was wondering that in list perhaps we could provide why we consider a term non-inclusive. Maybe it is just me but why is `sanity` considered non-inclusive?

https://gist.github.com/seanmhanson/fe370c2d8bd2b3228680e38899baf5cc has a pretty reasonable explanation about why `sanity` is problematic.

In D114025#3140204 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114025#3140204>, @lebedev.ri wrote:

> How dare you question our world's new overlords.

This is not a particularly constructive comment...

Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D114025/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D114025