Febbe added a comment. In D137205#3950722 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D137205#3950722>, @kadircet wrote:
> another thing that i noticed is usage of east consts in the implementation > files. no one seem to have brought it up so far (at least none that i can > see). > in theory there are no explicit guidelines about it in LLVM coding style, but > rest of the codebase uses west const convention. so i am not sure if straying > away from it here will make much sense. I think this should be regulated / enforced via clang-format if it is relevant at all to somebody. In terms of consistency, the east-const I use is more consistent. Not to the previous written code, but to the language. It is also completely irrelevant, because a new programmer will not understand that `const T const *` is actually `T const*` and not `T const * const`. An experienced programmer can understand it well either way. In my eyes it should therefore always be east-const and also be taught in such a way, since such irritations do not arise thereby at all. When it is ok for you to keep the east-const I would like to leave it as is, because it is on top a lot of work to manually search and replace those occurrences. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D137205/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D137205 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
