llvm dev - Aug 2013 - [LLVMdev] Coding Standards: Iterator begin and end functions.

One exception we have in the coding standard is that classes that look
like STL ones should use similar names for the methods (begin(),
push_back(), etc...).

But different parts of llvm have different opinions on how to handle
the related case of classes that are not STL like, but have multiple
collections that can be iterated over.

* llvm/IR uses global_begin, alias_begin, etc. I.E., singular name + _begin().
* llvm/Object uses begin_symbols, begin_sections, etc. I.E, begin_ +
plural name.
* others (YAML, LoopIterator) use beginSequence, beginFlowSequence, etc.

I would like to propose adding the the format used by llvm/IR to the
coding standard since it seems to be the most common.

Cheers,
Rafael

SGTM.

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Rafael Espíndola
<rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:
> One exception we have in the coding standard is that classes that look
> like STL ones should use similar names for the methods (begin(),
> push_back(), etc...).
>
> But different parts of llvm have different opinions on how to handle
> the related case of classes that are not STL like, but have multiple
> collections that can be iterated over.
>
> * llvm/IR uses global_begin, alias_begin, etc. I.E., singular name +
_begin().
> * llvm/Object uses begin_symbols, begin_sections, etc. I.E, begin_ +
> plural name.
> * others (YAML, LoopIterator) use beginSequence, beginFlowSequence, etc.
>
> I would like to propose adding the the format used by llvm/IR to the
> coding standard since it seems to be the most common.
>
> Cheers,
> Rafael
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at
gmail.com
> wrote:
> One exception we have in the coding standard is that classes that look
> like STL ones should use similar names for the methods (begin(),
> push_back(), etc...).
>
> But different parts of llvm have different opinions on how to handle
> the related case of classes that are not STL like, but have multiple
> collections that can be iterated over.
>
> * llvm/IR uses global_begin, alias_begin, etc. I.E., singular name +
> _begin().
> * llvm/Object uses begin_symbols, begin_sections, etc. I.E, begin_ +
> plural name.
> * others (YAML, LoopIterator) use beginSequence, beginFlowSequence, etc.
>
> I would like to propose adding the the format used by llvm/IR to the
> coding standard since it seems to be the most common.
>
Please do so. That is clearly the more consistent pattern to follow.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130802/77c94b9e/attachment.html>

On Aug 2, 2013, at 2:07 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com>
wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at
gmail.com> wrote:
> One exception we have in the coding standard is that classes that look
> like STL ones should use similar names for the methods (begin(),
> push_back(), etc...).
> 
> But different parts of llvm have different opinions on how to handle
> the related case of classes that are not STL like, but have multiple
> collections that can be iterated over.
> 
> * llvm/IR uses global_begin, alias_begin, etc. I.E., singular name +
_begin().
> * llvm/Object uses begin_symbols, begin_sections, etc. I.E, begin_ +
> plural name.
> * others (YAML, LoopIterator) use beginSequence, beginFlowSequence, etc.
> 
> I would like to propose adding the the format used by llvm/IR to the
> coding standard since it seems to be the most common.
> 
> Please do so. That is clearly the more consistent pattern to follow.
+1.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130802/3ccfeefa/attachment.html>

On Aug 2, 2013, at 1:56 PM, Rafael Espíndola <rafael.espindola at
gmail.com> wrote:
> One exception we have in the coding standard is that classes that look
> like STL ones should use similar names for the methods (begin(),
> push_back(), etc...).
> 
> But different parts of llvm have different opinions on how to handle
> the related case of classes that are not STL like, but have multiple
> collections that can be iterated over.
> 
> * llvm/IR uses global_begin, alias_begin, etc. I.E., singular name +
_begin().
> * llvm/Object uses begin_symbols, begin_sections, etc. I.E, begin_ +
> plural name.
> * others (YAML, LoopIterator) use beginSequence, beginFlowSequence, etc.
> 
> I would like to propose adding the the format used by llvm/IR to the
> coding standard since it seems to be the most common.
+1

-Chris

ok, r187902 should do it.

Cheers,
Rafael