search for: mplate

Hi folks, Git is on its way to learning how to ignore commits, allowing us to do variable renaming and other small refactorings without breaking git blame. It's like git-hyper-blame [1] but significantly more powerful as it uses fuzzy matching to match lines, including lines that may have been split or joined. A preview release of Git with this new feature is at:

On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 6:27 PM Michael Platings <Michael.Platings at arm.com> wrote: > Hi Rui, > > > > As per the provisional plan [1] we’re still at step 1: improving git > blame. The status of this is that there are some fairly mature patches in > the Git project’s queue [2], and I’m hopeful that it will be accepted in > something close to its current form. >

This thread is not active for a while, but I'm still interested in seeing a change. Reading through this thread, looks like we can agree that we want to change the local variable naming scheme so that they start with a lowercase letter. Besides that, there were discussions about lower_case, camelCase, m_ prefix, and each argument seems as convincing as others. I'm not sure what is the

This looks really great to me Rui, and I’m also pleased to see the positive comments on the review thread. Thank you for driving this forward! -Chris > On Jul 4, 2019, at 9:50 PM, Rui Ueyama <ruiu at google.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I wrote a tool <https://reviews.llvm.org/D64123> to batch-rename variable names so that they are in camelCase, and I applied the

Hi Rui, all, Yesterday I brought the variable-renaming commits in to Sony's downstream LLD. We have a merge-based flow rather than continually rebasing our patch set, but it went reasonably smoothly nevertheless. The one snag I hit is that the tool initially missed variables mentioned in assert()s. I didn't put much time in to investigating this, but I presume it's because my

authenticated_test_helper.rb: m. RDoc failure in vendor/plugins/acts_as_authenticated/generators/authenticated/te mplates/authenticated_test_helper.rb at or around line 113 column 4 Before reporting this, could you check that the file you''re documenting compiles cleanly--RDoc is not a full Ruby parser, and gets confused easily if fed invalid programs. The internal error was: c:/ruby/lib/ruby/1.8/rdoc/pars...

I am getting this error when I run ruby doc with following command rdoc -a -F -f html -S -N -o doc1 ...........authenticated_test_helper.rb: m. RDoc failure in vendor/plugins/acts_as_authenticated/generators/authenticated/te mplates/authenticated_test_helper.rb at or around line 113 column 4 Before reporting this, could you check that the file you''re documenting compiles cleanly--RDoc is not a full Ruby parser, and gets confused easily if fed invalid programs. The internal error was: c:/ruby/lib/ruby/1.8/rdoc/pars...

Thanks very much for all the feedback. I've tried to collect the information into a proposal for a transition plan: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59251. -Michael -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190312/8c8a6961/attachment.html>

Hi Rui, Is your tool in a good state to be run on people's downstream repositories? It would be nice to be able to update variable names there too at the same time. James On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 08:24, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Thanks, Chris. > > Looks like everybody is at least mildly comfortable with my variable name > renaming change,

Hi Rui, I’m totally positive on switching to camelCase convention. In fact I have been always uncomfortable with the current naming approach. My only suggestion/concern is that we should provide a transition path not only for the trunk code in the repository, but for eventual out-of-trunk code with implementations of custom architectures. I have currently a custom backend implemented on top of

Good point, too. I believe I can find lines starting with `@parameter` and apply the same name conversion rules to identifiers after `@parameter`. Since lld doesn't use doxygen comments, it is fine for now, but before moving forward, I'll address that. Thank you for pointing that out. On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 8:20 PM Alex Brachet-Mialot < alexbrachetmialot at gmail.com> wrote: >

Rui, I have created D64474 to change comments explicitly stating the parameter names for constants ( /*parameterName=*/<constant> ). I did this by hand to match the new variable names. Do you know if there would be a way to update these comments with a tool similar to what you used to change these names? Perhaps it would be much more difficult, I'm guessing clang's AST doesn't

...create script/process/spawner create script/process/inspector create script/runner create script/server create script/plugin create public/dispatch.rb create public/dispatch.cgi create public/dispatch.fcgi create public/404.html (erb):9:in `template'': compile error (SyntaxError) (erb):9: syntax error, unexpected tINTEGER, expecting $end from c:/ror/lib/ ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.1.0/bin/../lib/rails_generator/commands.rb:287:in `te mplate'' from c:/ror/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.1.0/bin/../lib/rails_generato...

...ems/rails-1.1.6/lib/fcgi_handler.rb:53:in `process!'' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-1.1.6/lib/fcgi_handler.rb:23:in `process!'' /home/chall/radrails/workspace/chip2/public/dispatch.fcgi:24 Rendering /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-1.12.5/lib/action_controller/te mplates/rescues/layout.rhtml (500 Internal Error) we can''t figure out where the heck this is happening. there are only 2 references to some controller code on lines 123 and 110 which are 110: render :update do |page| 123: done_responses.each do |r| if anyone has any idea on what might be ha...

...ms/1.8/gems/rails-1.1.2/lib/fcgi_handler.rb:53:in `process!'' /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-1.1.2/lib/fcgi_handler.rb:23:in `process!'' /var/www/html/eSimplyTest/public/dispatch.fcgi:26 Rendering /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-1.12.1/lib/action_controller/te mplates/rescues/layout.rhtml (500 Internal Error) =========== END OF ERROR ======================= I''m under the impression that the relative path to my config file is OK and that it will just be interpreted relative to RAILS_ROOT (which to the best of my knowledge, is correct)? Is that not...

Hi Denis, On Fri, Jul 19, 2019 at 6:55 AM Bakhvalov, Denis <denis.bakhvalov at intel.com> wrote: > Hello Rui, all, > > We recently went through the LLD renaming process at Intel and it went > reasonably well too. > Very glad to hear that! > However I encountered one case when the tool seems not to work: > > > > int foo() > > { > > int A = 1;