whisperity added a comment. In D69560#2549959 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D69560#2549959>, @steveire wrote:
> Why "easily" instead of "suspicious", "spuriously" or any of the other words > that are already used? The name was @aaron.ballman's idea after we postponed the `experimental-cppcoreguidelines-yaddayaddayadda...`. The best I could come up with is `potentially`. The `suspicious` is a problem because this check is an interface check, not a call-site check. (The sister check is currently called `suspiciously-swapped-argument` or something like that.) The original check idea from C++ Core Guidelines <http://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppCoreGuidelines.md#Ri-unrelated> also uses the phrase: > Reason: Adjacent arguments of the same type are easily swapped by mistake. However, `potentially-swappable-parameters` just sounds... wonky. It does not carry the weight the rule otherwise meant to. `weakly-typed-parameters`? I am not good with names, sadly. ---- I am conflicted about saying that "easily" **always** refers to some "positive aspect", however. Use a [[unnamed trademarked safety device]] because you can end up easily cutting off your finger during work. Do not touch a stove/hot water fountain, because you can easily get burnt. Leaving Christmas candles unattended could easily lead to a house fire. Does anyone want to get hurt, burnt, their house destroyed, etc.? There is nothing "positive" in these suggestions or regulations either. And we are doing a tool that is practically the same thing, trying to prevent a (different kind of) fire. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D69560/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D69560 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
