ZarkoCA added a comment.

In D114025#3140161 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D114025#3140161>, @martong wrote:

> Do we have a comprehensive list of non-inclusive terms and their inclusive 
> correspondent somewhere available?
> I mean `master` -> `main`, `white list` -> `inclusive list`, `sanity` -> 
> `validation`, ...
> I'd assume that we go through that list, and that could give me a clue of how 
> many such patches to expect in the future.
>
> Also, I was wondering that in list perhaps we could provide why we consider a 
> term non-inclusive. Maybe it is just me but why is `sanity` considered 
> non-inclusive?

I don't know of an official LLVM list, there could be one but I am not certain.

These two sources have been a good place to start for me: 
https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-knodel-terminology-00.html
https://developers.google.com/style/inclusive-documentation

I have been working on finding replacements for `blacklist`, `whitelist`, and 
`sanity` in Clang/LLVM and @quinnp has been working on replacing `master` when 
possible. That's the extent of our list.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D114025/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D114025

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to