[llvm] r179601 - Cleanup naming: DataLayout s/TD/DL/

[Eli Bendersky]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com>
Date: Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 3:44 PM
Subject: Re: [llvm] r179601 - Cleanup naming: DataLayout s/TD/DL/
To: Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com>


On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote:

>
> On Apr 16, 2013, at 2:32 PM, Eli Bendersky <eliben at google.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Jim Grosbach <grosbach at apple.com> wrote:
>
>> DL and dl often are used for debugloc elsewhere. Thoughts on alternatives?
>
>
> Good point. I don't think there should be a lot of places where there's a
> conflict between the two, and wherever it is, the conflict can be resolved
> by using longer an more meaningful names. I'm not sure it's the only place
> in LLVM code where there's such a conflict...
>
> Eli
>
> Sounds reasonable. Just something that caught my eye. Thanks!
>
>

Rats... a lot of work has to be done to make it consistent:

$ git grep "\bTD\b" | grep "\.cpp"|wc -l
1766
$ git grep "\bDL\b" | grep "\.cpp"|wc -l
2705

And there are a number of places where both are used (FastIsel and its
target subclasses, for instance).

DL makes more sense for DataLayout because it's most similar to other
"information classes", i.e:

  const TargetMachine &TM;
  const DataLayout &TD;               <------------ DL
  const TargetInstrInfo &TII;
  const TargetLowering &TLI;
  const TargetRegisterInfo &TRI;

So DebugLoc probably has to cede its throne and be converted to DbgLoc or
something similar? Again, that's ~4.5K substitutions to make in order to be
completely consistent :-(

Eli
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20130416/d7bc2039/attachment.html>