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

[David Greene via llvm-dev]

<paul.robinson at sony.com> writes:

>> "lower_case" is a pretty drastic change from CamelCase and camelCase.
>> So far the only argument for it I've seen is, "lldb uses it all over the
>> place."  Having one subproject drive the standard for everything else
>> seems backward.  It's certainly possible I missed other opinions on this
>> though.
>
> You have. For example, here's a "significant improvement" comment:
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-February/130214.html

But I see nothing there about *why* it would be a "significant
improvement."  At best I see an allusion to something like, "this is
really different than anytyhing we've done before so it doesn't conflict
with any existing naming."  If I've misinterpreted I hope Chandler will
correct me.

I agree with Chandler that any change will require lots of buy-in from
the community.  What's the plan to measure/get that?

James Henderson <jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk> writes:

> You might treat "m_" as silent, but I don't. It's just not how my mind
> works when reading code. As for moving entities between class and
> local scope - I've found myself regularly going from local scope to
> class scope in the past in other projects at least, although I can't
> say the same for LLVM. I do know I'd get annoyed by typing m_* before
> every member variable I have to write, whereas I don't for using real
> words, but I accept that might just be me.

It's not.  My brain works the same way.

                             -David