search for: acronyms

Can you better this String acronym method? def acronym name letters=[] name.each_char {|char| letters<<char if char[0]>=65 and char[0]<=90} acronym = letters.join " " end chris -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

> On Feb 12, 2019, at 4:02 AM, Björn Pettersson A via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > (Sorry if this subject already has been discussed, but I could not find any clear rules/recommendations.) > > What would the recommendation be for acronyms (I’ve seen the rule about avoiding them unless they are “well known”, > but sometimes an acronym is useful, and we at least need to have some recommendation for the “well known” ones). > > Example: > > if (ConstantExpr *CE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(V)) > if (CE-...

Hello, is there an acronym method in php markdown extra ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://six.pairlist.net/pipermail/markdown-discuss/attachments/20070306/e146240b/attachment.html

> "LLVM" is officially no longer an acronym. The acronym it once expanded too was confusing, and inappropriate almost from day 1. :) As LLVM has grown to encompass other subprojects, it became even less useful and meaningless. > > In short, it is just "The LLVM Project", and LLVM doesn't stand for anything anymore. It is a nice short domain name though :)

On Dec 21, 2011, at 7:05 PM, 陳韋任 wrote: >> "LLVM" is officially no longer an acronym. The acronym it once expanded too was confusing, and inappropriate almost from day 1. :) As LLVM has grown to encompass other subprojects, it became even less useful and meaningless. >> >> In short, it is just "The LLVM Project", and LLVM doesn't stand for anything

...n for some unclear reason. > On 12. Feb 2019, at 13:02, Björn Pettersson A via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > (Sorry if this subject already has been discussed, but I could not find any clear rules/recommendations.) > > What would the recommendation be for acronyms (I’ve seen the rule about avoiding them unless they are “well known”, > but sometimes an acronym is useful, and we at least need to have some recommendation for the “well known” ones). > > Example: > > if (ConstantExpr *CE = dyn_cast<ConstantExpr>(V)) > if (CE-...

http://us4.samba.org/samba/docs/SambaIntro.html Through his E'mail contacts, Andrew discovered that NetBIOS and SMB were actually (though nominally) documented. With this new information at his fingertips he set to work again, but soon ran into another problem. He was contacted by a company claiming trademark on the name that he had chosen for his server software. Rather than cause a fuss,

On 2/18/2019 4:15 AM, Michael Platings via llvm-dev wrote: > Taking my previous example [1]: > > InnerLoopVectorizer LB(L, PSE, LI, DT, TLI, TTI, AC, ORE, VF.Width, IC, > &LVL, &CM); > > If we imagine that over time it evolves such that 50% of the variables have been renamed to camelBack versions of the type names, then it will look like this: > >

The LLVM term in Wikipedia still uses the old explanation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Level_Virtual_Machine On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:15 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Dec 21, 2011, at 7:05 PM, 陳韋任 wrote: > >>> "LLVM" is officially no longer an acronym.  The acronym it once expanded too was confusing, and inappropriate almost

...; >>> On 12. Feb 2019, at 13:02, Björn Pettersson A via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> (Sorry if this subject already has been discussed, but I could not find any clear rules/recommendations.) >>> What would the recommendation be for acronyms (I’ve seen the rule >>> about avoiding them unless they are “well known”, >>> but sometimes an acronym is useful, and we at least need to have some recommendation for the “well known” ones). >>> Example: >>> if (ConstantExpr *CE = dyn_cast<ConstantExp...

...nsics have 'llvm.' as a prefix, and some also have some additional prefix 'llvm.dbg.', 'llvm.eh.', 'llvm.experimental.', etc., but after that we lose consistency. When there is just a single word (or acronym) everything is fine, but the way we join multiple words (or acronyms) falls into three categories: 1. No separator (e.g. @llvm.readcyclecounter) 2. Using '.' as a separator (e.g. @llvm.sadd.with.overflow) 3. Using '_' as a separator (e.g. @llvm.read_register) I propose that we standardize on (2) -- words with dots -- as it seems to have a plural...

On Dec 21, 2011, at 8:35 AM, Jianzhou Zhao wrote: > Hi LLVM, > > I have a question that is irrelevant to LLVM developing, but do not > know where to post. I found the LLVM webpage uses the following new > introduction of LLVM > "The LLVM Project is a collection of modular and reusable compiler > and toolchain technologies. Despite its name, LLVM has little to do >

Hi LLVM, I have a question that is irrelevant to LLVM developing, but do not know where to post. I found the LLVM webpage uses the following new introduction of LLVM "The LLVM Project is a collection of modular and reusable compiler and toolchain technologies. Despite its name, LLVM has little to do with traditional virtual machines, ..." I remember the old webpage said that LLVM =

> I enjoyed the new coding style in recent patches. Camel case makes it easy > to pick a descriptive name. Starting functions and variables with lower > cases reduces chances to conflict with a type name. Honestly speaking, I don't. Especially in the cases when varname is made from an acronym. E.g. MachineInstr *MI looks much better than MachineInstr *mi, etc. See latest Rafael's

TL;DR: change the rule for variable names from UpperCamelCase to lowerCamelCase. Just to get wider visibility on this, I'm raising this again as an RFC, as suggested by Roman Lebedev. My original post from last week is here and gives a rationale: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-February/129854.html. There seemed to be general agreement that the status quo is not ideal.

Dear R-community, maybe someone can help me with this: I've been using the loess() smoother for quite a while now, and for the matter of documentation I'd like to resolve the acronym LOESS. Unfortunately there's no explanation in the help file, and I didn't get anything convincing from google either. I know that the predecessor LOWESS stands for "Locally Weighted

The R-exts manual still says Note also that for running @LaTeX{}, the Debian @acronym{GNU}/Linux @acronym{CRAN} check systems use the Debian TeXLive at footnote{currently the long obsolete TeXLive 2009.} distribution (@uref{http://packages.debian.org/@/en/@/sid/@/texlive}); the Fedora and and what is in the footnote has not been true for quite some time as a visit to the URL (or to the

...t turns out that underscore and camelize are not reversible in cases where there are 3 or more capital letters. As there is a dependency between class name and file name I think it would be beneficial for underscore to be reversible, however this would change the existing behavior of how it handles acronyms. Thanks, Rich C. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send ema...

Hi Tim, Sorry, I'm not sure I follow. Are you maybe thinking that if the identifiers were tagged to specify scope, people would still be trying to use acronyms or single letters? So that, what in future code might be F, would instead be _f and that would be worse than f_ or s_f? I was thinking instead F would be (for new or modified code) _function or _fnctn or _func (as an object of type Function). Again, sorry -- I don't see how prepended undersc...

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 05:52:02PM +0100, Michael Kruse via llvm-dev wrote: > * The library is named LLVMISL and contained in the lib/ISL folder to > work best with LLVM's component system. The component's name "ISL" was > chosen over "isl" as it matches the capitalization of other > two/three-letter-acronym components. Are the ISL sources themselve put