search for: coalface

...iority... > > > >> How did all of those uses get into the codebase? Does it indicate that > the guide is not followed, or does it indicate that the guide is too > subjective, or that maybe the 'the type must be obvios' guide does not > reflect the 'reality at the coalface' anymore? Should those uses of auto be > changed? > > > > My understanding is that there has been no widely understood or accepted > policy, so different coders and reviewers are doing different things. > > One of the things which has no consensus here is whether 'au...

...idespread change would be high priority... > How did all of those uses get into the codebase? Does it indicate that the guide is not followed, or does it indicate that the guide is too subjective, or that maybe the 'the type must be obvios' guide does not reflect the 'reality at the coalface' anymore? Should those uses of auto be changed? My understanding is that there has been no widely understood or accepted policy, so different coders and reviewers are doing different things. > How is a new contributor to react to any of that? What are the real criteria that we can use to d...

I'm not advocating AAA. However this is a proposal for more modern thinking regarding the permissiveness of auto in LLVM codebases. Currently the rule on the use of auto is here: https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#use-auto-type-deduction-to-make-code-more-readable It is quite strict. It allows the use of auto for * lambdas * iterators because they are long to type * casts to