sammccall added a comment. In D80079#2049459 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80079#2049459>, @MyDeveloperDay wrote:
> I feel like there might something of a concencus forming.. If I take the time > to redo following the suggestions @sammccall do you think you could live with > it? Yeah, LGTM. The alignment of the existing name with clang wasn't as close as I thought anyway. Sorry about adding friction here. I feel like `isCppOrObjC` doesn't cover the "essence" of the thing being tested. But it's hard to come up with a great name because it's not clear whether this essence is about C or about C++ (we don't distinguish, and the answer varies depending on callsite). Actually `isCFamily` might be a better name here - it's short, decides this is about C but clearly includes the others too. But I'm bikeshedding now, I can live with the current or any other option. Regarding helpers vs no helpers for the trivial cases: I'm personally not a fan but this is just a question of taste and at this point your opinion is more important I think. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80079/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80079 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
