This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] manage dom-walk_data initialization and finalization with constructors and destructors
- From: Trevor Saunders <tsaunders at mozilla dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Michael Matz <matz at suse dot de>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Richard Sandiford <rdsandiford at googlemail dot com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 08:05:50 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] manage dom-walk_data initialization and finalization with constructors and destructors
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20130904145911 dot GC17620 at tsaunders-iceball dot corp dot tor1 dot mozilla dot com> <522759C8 dot 5040802 at redhat dot com> <20130911000350 dot GA28492 at tsaunders-iceball dot corp dot tor1 dot mozilla dot com> <52389CB1 dot 60504 at redhat dot com> <5239126A dot 6010702 at redhat dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1309181640400 dot 9949 at wotan dot suse dot de> <5239D985 dot 4080205 at redhat dot com> <alpine dot LNX dot 2 dot 00 dot 1309181849550 dot 9949 at wotan dot suse dot de> <87fvt065ro dot fsf at talisman dot default> <CAFiYyc0xY9Wrn1MhWjM-u5L+OE583Yr4H5HedYi4yYaMOudp-Q at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 10:13:27AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Richard Sandiford
> <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Michael Matz <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> >> What's the benefit of reading and writing such noisy lines? :
> >> *out_mode = mode_;
> >> mode_ = GET_MODE_WIDER_MODE (mode_);
> >> count_++;
> >> The uglification merely makes code harder to write and read, it should be
> >> used in cases where you _don't_ want developers to write such names.
> > Heh. Since it's my code being used as the example here: I also find it
> > very ugly FWIW. I only added the underscores because that's what the
> > conventions said.
> > But we're never going to get consensus on this kind of thing. E.g. I
> > know some people really hate the GNU formatting style (although I very
> > much like it). So I just held my nose while writing the patch.
> Btw, I've come around multiple coding-styles in the past and I definitely
> would prefer m_mode / m_count to mark members vs. mode_ and count_.
> (and s_XXX for static members IIRC).
what about a_foo for arguments? I'd prefer m_/s_foo for members /
static things too fwiw.
> > Thanks,
> > Richard