[llvm-dev] RFC: changing variable naming rules in LLVM codebase (original) (raw)

David Greene via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Feb 25 07:17:18 PST 2019

<paul.robinson at sony.com> writes:

"lowercase" 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

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list