MaskRay added a comment.

In D108265#2953305 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108265#2953305>, @dblaikie wrote:

> In D108265#2952555 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108265#2952555>, @MaskRay wrote:
>
>> The number of top-level projects using `VariableName` is smaller than the 
>> number of projects not using the style.
>> The top-level variable style just provoked projects to either override the 
>> options (flang/, lld/, mlir/) or disable the check.
>> `VariableName` is not even a suitable suggestion for new projects.
>>
>> So the  `VariableName` setting does not belong to the top-level. llvm/ and 
>> clang-tools-extra/ should set it by themselves.
>>
>>> CodingStandards.rst: "Variable names should be nouns (as they represent 
>>> state). The name should be camel case, and start with an upper case letter 
>>> (e.g. Leader or Boats)."
>>
>> This applies to llvm/, clang/, clang-tools-extra/ (and perhaps something I 
>> missed), but is not true for many other projects 
>> (flang,lld,lldb,mlir,libcxx,libcxxabi,libunwind,compiler-rt,...)
>
> I think it applies to the LLVM umbrella/project as a whole - and should apply 
> to any new projects. (I think it's a mistake that projects started that did 
> not adhere to this naming convention (the same as if they didn't adhere to 
> other aspects of the LLVM coding standard) and created divergence where the 
> coding standards are meant to avoid that/promote consistency)

I think it only applies to code which is currently using `VariableName`.

In https://llvm.org/docs/Proposals/VariableNames.html related discussions, 
people all agree that `VariableName` was a mistake.
(Some people took the stance that "renaming variables would cause churn and 
downstream maintenance burden, so don't do")

But new code doesn't need to use the (inferior) style.

> I think it's appropriate for the top level default to match what's described 
> in the LLVM Coding Standards document & to change that document should be an 
> llvm-dev discussion. (I thought there was one a while back, though I don't 
> recall any specific conclusions coming out of that)




Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D108265/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D108265

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to