On Jun 29, 2012, at 2:05 PM, Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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). Works for me. - Doug
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
