[LLVMdev] DIFactory

[Talin]

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Renato Golin <rengolin at systemcall.org>wrote:

> On 18 February 2011 21:34, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sorry, I meant DIBuilder.
>
> DIBuilder is the new DIFactory. I've been playing with it this week
> and it's much easier and straightforward to use. I'm still having
> problems to create arrays, though.
>
> As far as I remember (from the 2010 meeting), the idea was to replace
> and deprecate DIFactory.
>
> I'm not saying we should do it now, just saying Clang should have no
> more deps on the old DIFactory to avoid header pollution, since it's
> only on one enum... ;)
>
> Yeah, I remember that conversation - I just didn't know that any action had
been taken.

However, my other concern is this: According to the LLVM Coding Standards
document (http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#ll_naming):

*Function names*
 should be verb phrases (as they represent actions), and command-like
function should be imperative. The name should be camel case, and start with
a lower case letter (e.g. openFile() or isFoo()).


The coding standards say functions should begin with a lower case letter,
but I see a lot of new code (not just DIBuilder) that uses method names that
begin with an upper case letter. Is the document incorrect, or is there
basically no enforcement?

-- 
-- Talin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110218/c163935f/attachment.html>