echristo added a reviewer: vitalybuka. echristo added a comment. In D96203#2548495 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96203#2548495>, @aaron.ballman wrote:
> In D96203#2548471 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96203#2548471>, @mibintc wrote: > >> In D96203#2546856 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D96203#2546856>, @aaron.ballman >> wrote: >> >>> Thank you for working on this! >>> >>>> This changes the option names that include substring blacklist to >>>> blocklist. >>> >>> I think this change works in some places, but in other places we say things >>> like "blocklisted" which feels a bit awkward. I don't super love the name >>> `blocklist`, but I don't super hate it either. All the alternative names I >>> come up with aren't really great either, like `UnsanitiziedEntities` or >>> `IgnoredObjects`. Maybe someone will have a better idea here than me, but I >>> do think the current name is an improvement over the old name. >> >> There is a pre-existing patch https://reviews.llvm.org/D82244 using block >> and allow, that's why I chose blocklist. Although going in cold I would >> prefer to use allow and deny, and block seems to me a little like cheating >> (too similar to black). > > That was my concern as well -- I can easily imagine someone seeing > "blocklisted" and thinking it was a typo for "blacklisted" and undoing the > change to comments with an NFC change. > >> However I can "disagree and commit" (cf. >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disagree_and_commit) with this choice of >> wording. I can search out the awkward Blocklisted and come up with different >> phrasing in the prose, but I think names in the program should use blocklist >> so that they can be easily connected to the option name for future >> maintainers of llvm. I'll check this. > > I agree that the frontend option names and the internal variable names need > to connect to one another, so if we pick a new term, it should be used > consistently. I'd be mildly happier with a better term than blocklist, but I > can live with that name too. FWIW I would prefer denylist as well. (Also uses of whitelist should be allowlist, but also incremental :) -eric Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D96203/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D96203 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
