On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Douglas Gregor <[email protected]> wrote:
> CamelCase is fine for these. I notice that there's some inconsistency with > 'has' names, e.g., hasDescendant vs. HasType. > Update: Chandler voted for using llvm coding style (and I agree). The argument is that the callable classes we have are just classes to work around missing variadic templates and that they will become functions anyway once we get C++11 into llvm (in a future, far, far away). Thoughts? /Manuel
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
