similar to: RFC: should we spell lambdas like functions?

> On Jul 5, 2018, at 1:09 PM, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:57 PM Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: >> I argue we should spell C++ lambdas (and other function-like variables) like functions, not like variables. >> >> - Use verbs, not nouns. > > I think I agree with

> On Jul. 5, 2018, at 18:12, Bruce Hoult via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 5:30 PM, Adrian Prantl via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > > > On Jul 5, 2018, at 1:09 PM, Rui Ueyama via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at

Do local lambdas get named like variables or like functions? E.g. void foo() { auto helper = [](...){...}; // or auto Helper = [](...){...}; } My gut is that it should be lowercase (named like a function) since I got a weird feeling in my stomach seeing an upper-case name being called like a function in new code. -- Sean Silva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment

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.

I would assume that the proper name in this case is constantExpr, and not CE. This is not really an acronym, but rather a shortcut taken 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.) > >

I''ve been looking into RESTful approaches lately. Everything I know my dog, Lelu, taught me. REST (REpresentational State Transfer) is an architectural technique for networked applications first described by Roy Fielding in his dissertation at UC Irvine-- excellent work, especially considering the tempting proximity of Newport Beach. As Lelu described it to me, REST strives

It very much depends on what is following the code snippit. If the second "if" is guarding a substantial block of code, "constantExpr" might very well be a good name. Otherwise something like "cExpr" or "constExpr" might be fine. In the past when I have seen things like "CE" in the code, it's not always immediately clear to me what it is. I

I’d like to discuss revising the LLVM coding conventions to change the naming of variables to start with a lowercase letter. This should not be a discussion on the pain of such a transition, or how to get from here to there, but rather, if there is a better place to be. My arguments for the change are: 1. No other popular C++ coding style uses capitalized variable names. For instance here

Luke, I thought about what you said about nouns, but having trouble coming up with an example of what you mean. Would you be willing to rework my example into the words your talking about? I''m not asking for a solution here...this is more about how to think about the problem being solved. Mike B. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent

I am having a heck of a time understanding the new rest craze in rails. what I think I understand so far: 1 rest is about the way we use http to access information on the internet. 2 http was created with nouns and verbs in mind, but the only verbs that are supported in browsers and server software today are ''post'' and ''get''. Other useful verbs include put

> 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

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Nick Kledzik <kledzik at apple.com> wrote: > >> I’d like to discuss revising the LLVM coding conventions to change the >> naming of variables to start with a lowercase letter. >> > > Almost all of your negatives of the current conventions

On 2014 Mar 2, at 22:27, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Saleem Abdulrasool <compnerd at compnerd.org> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 9:26 PM, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > > On Mar 2, 2014, at 8:53 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 3 March 2014

I have a question about how URLs are created. This happens with the edit action on the controller. Instead of creating the URL as http://site.com/edit/1 it sticks the ID in the middle: http://site.com/1/edit Two questions: 1. What exactly is the reason behind this default? 2. How do I override it? I''ve tried searching but I''m not sure what terminology that I should search

On 2014 Mar 4, at 20:23, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith <dexonsmith at apple.com> wrote: > There’s a decent selection of range adaptors in Boost.Range [1]. I’m not sure the license [2] allows copying the source (IANAL), but any reason not use the same names? I don’t see any reason to reinvent the

Xapians! If tomorrow Xapian search engine would achieved the same performance and result in searches as Google we would not be able to beat Google, because we would create only a copy of the searches that already exists from Google search engine. However there is a way to beat anyone, and there is a way to beat Google successfully as well just do not give up. Some see it as implementing Ajax, or

Greetings! I''m thinking of setting up a table of "domains", consisting of the core fields id, code, name, description, and type. Users is a domain, orders is a domain, recipes is a domain, etc. Domain attributes other than those covered by the core fields will go to, say, a user_other_fields table, recipe_other_fields, etc. I see the advantage of having all

I''m trying to be able to use puppet to modify an existing firewall on a web server. The idea is that if I use puppet to do this, then if the machine ever has to be rebuilt, aside from backups, I have a documented configuration. I looked at the module that was on the wiki that had a perl program and what not, but I don''t think I''m clear on what my thinking should be

> On 2015-Jun-13, at 09:12, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 12:52 AM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings all, > > I'm working on refactoring the alias analysis layers to remove the usage of analysis groups and make the logic sharable between old and new pass managers, and I have a

After having read through this long thread, I'm having trouble spotting a case of someone saying lowerCamelCase variable names is a bad idea. Nick's original proposal looks good to me. What do we need to do to move forward here? Thanks, Greg On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Oct 13, 2014, at 4:31 PM, Chandler Carruth