Closed vext01 closed 4 years ago
As a general point (not really for this PR), is it a bit verbose if so many functions start with lower_
? In my experience, a shorter prefix is more sustainable in the long term (e.g. l_
).
I prefer lower_
I'm afraid.
Let me expand on this, as I do feel somewhat strongly.
I can't count the number of times I've had to ask what the meaning of a single- (or two-) letter prefix is. I'm in the position where I can easily ask what they mean, but not everyone has that luxury. It's better if the code speaks for itself, leaving no ambiguity.
It's not the Rust way and the precedent in the compiler is to use descriptive names, e.g. codegen_block
instead of c_block
.
We've agree offline to leave the naming convention as-is in this repository.
Looks fine. Please squash.
As for the lowering_
discussion, I'm leaning towards Edd here. It's still short enough to not offend my eyes. If the function name was super longer then that would need another discussion.
splat.
bors r+
I think this is ready to go.