JDevlieghere wrote:
> > Always refer to lldb as lldb not LLDB, to match what the user sees on the
> > command line.
>
> If this were any other doc I'd say it should always be LLDB and GDB as that's
> the projects' branding. In this doc I think it's better to imagine the user
> is looking at side by side command lines.
I'm not sure I follow that reasoning. In all fairness I might be biased as I
try to consistently use "LLDB" unless I'm referring tot the binary or the
prompt. Ignoring things like `(lldb)`, `lldb-` and `lldb.`, it looks like the
docs favor "LLDB" as well.
```
$ rg 'LLDB' | wc -l
605
$ rg 'lldb' | awk '!/\(lldb\)/ && !/lldb\./ && !/lldb-/' | wc -l
362
```
Personally I'd lean towards more consistency.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/90594
_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
