sammccall added a comment. Honestly, I really dislike names in the style of makeError/createError. My favorite name for this would be Error (i.e. a constructor) but that would involve redesigning it (which is a good idea, but an impossible yak-shave). I guess makeError is still better than the status quo, but not enough to feel motivated to clean this up right now. Maybe someone else wants to pick this up?
> I think the key point is that error creates an Error object, and this object > must be checked before destructing. error name makes it look like a print > function, I'd prefer to add a verb to the name, e.g. makeError This is exactly backwards IMO - a function used for its value (like this one) doesn't need a verb, a function used for its side-effects (like log) does. https://swift.org/documentation/api-design-guidelines/#strive-for-fluent-usage seems pretty well-thought-out to me. LLVM guidelines don't reflect this, but I haven't been able to find anyone making a positive case for them beyond legacy and inertia. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D83419/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D83419 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
