(original) (raw)

It is unfortunate that we are using a different coding scheme for LLD than LLVM, but I'm leaning toward the view that switching to LLVM style will cost too much if it means we are going to lose virtually all commit history. A patch to switch to LLVM style would rename all local and member variables, so it would touch all the lines. Diff is not powerful enough to trace the history beyond variable renaming. svn blame would become useless.

I have no strong opinion on this. If many other LLD developers really want to make this happen, I can bear with that. It doesn't feel very productive thing to do to me, though.

On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Tim Northover <t.p.northover@gmail.com> wrote:

> So with that in mind, I would like to ask, would it be possible to consider
\> switching to LLVM style for lld?

One particular feature of lld's current style is particularly dodgy:
starting member variables with '\_' makes undefined behaviour very easy
to introduce (if the first real char is upper case; there's already
plenty of examples).

It's one of the more innocuous forms of UB, but still bad form for an
LLVM project. If even we can't get it right...

Cheers.

Tim.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev@cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev