[llvm-dev] changing variable naming rules in LLVM codebase

[Zachary Turner via llvm-dev]

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
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 1:47 PM David Greene via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> It very much depends on what is following the code snippit.  If the
> second "if" is guarding a substantial block of code, "constantExpr"
> might very well be a good name.  Otherwise something like "cExpr" or
> "constExpr" might be fine.
>
> In the past when I have seen things like "CE" in the code, it's not
> always immediately clear to me what it is.  I have to go find the
> declaration.
>
>                              -David
>
>
> Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
>
> > The reason is clear: the variable name in such a context doesn't add
> > anything, since it's obvious what it is. Long names should be used
> > where meaning needs to be conveyed, otherwise they just obfuscate the
> > code needlessly.
> >
> > -Krzysztof
> >
> > On 2/12/2019 3:17 PM, Alex Denisov via llvm-dev wrote:
> >> I would assume that the proper name in this case is constantExpr, and
> not CE.
> >> This is not really an acronym, but rather a shortcut taken for some
> unclear reason.
> >>
> >>> On 12. Feb 2019, at 13:02, Björn Pettersson A via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> (Sorry if this subject already has been discussed, but I could not
> find any clear rules/recommendations.)
> >>>   What would the recommendation be for acronyms (I’ve seen the rule
> >>> about avoiding them unless they are “well known”,
> >>> but sometimes an acronym is useful, and we at least need to have some
> recommendation for the “well known” ones).
> >>>   Example:
> >>>        if (ConstantExpr *CE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(V))
> >>>        if (CE->getOpcode() == Instruction::GetElementPtr &&
> >>>            CE->getOperand(0)->isNullValue()) {
> >>>   In the above example, is the recommendation to use “ce” instead
> >>> of “CE” now? Or should it be “cE”?
> >>> With lowerCamelCase one might think that “cE” is the correct one
> (although I personally think that one looks quite ugly).
> >>>   Maybe there should be an exception that variable names that start
> >>> with an acronym still should start with an upper case letter?
> >>>   /Björn
> >>>     From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of
> >>> Michael Platings via llvm-dev
> >>> Sent: den 7 februari 2019 23:11
> >>> To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>> Cc: nd <nd at arm.com>
> >>> Subject: [llvm-dev] RFC: changing variable naming rules in LLVM
> codebase
> >>>   TL;DR: change the rule for variable names from UpperCamelCase to
> >>> lowerCamelCase.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Just to get wider visibility on this, I'm raising this again as an
> RFC, as suggested by Roman Lebedev.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> My original post from last week is here and gives a rationale:
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-February/129854.html. There
> seemed to be general agreement that the status quo is not ideal.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Chris Lattner pointed out that this came up in 2014 as well:
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2014-October/077685.html>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I've created a patch to implement the change. Review and comments
> welcome: https://reviews.llvm.org/D57896>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190212/67ba83e8/attachment-0001.html>