[llvm] r225240 - [PM] Add a collection of no-op analysis passes and switch the new pass

[Duncan P. N. Exon Smith]

> On 2015-Jan-05, at 22:25, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Duncan Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2015, at 9:00 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm probably weird, but I have two things in my head "No Op" which is just an abbreviation that I would write, well, as I did. Then there is a nop which is a single thing...
>> 
>> Wow, I"m even self-inconsistent and have been merrily naming things 'Noop' as well. Best part of course is that these things *aren't noops*! Anyways, I'm really wondering whether this term is useful at all here....
> 
> Yeah, I think it might just be the wrong term. 
> 
> Of your other suggestions I like "stub" the best.  Maybe "empty"?
> 
> Empty, to me, doesn't convey the degree to which these are synthetic and not intended for "real" usage. Stub does indicate that nicely...

SGTM.  It actually wasn't clear to me the degree to which these are
synthetic, another strike against "no-op" and its relatives ;).

You could even be more direct, with "fake" or "synthetic".