gchatelet wrote: > > The static functions renaming is going to produce a lot of noise but I > > guess this is too late already... Shall we revert to keep the change > > minimal? @nikic @paulwalker-arm WDYT ? > > For my money the functions were originally named correctly and then > erroneously changed to (a) diverge from the coding standard, and (b) > unknowingly introduced a bug caused by the new naming. For both reasons I'm > happy to revert to the original naming via this patch.
That would be [my patch](https://reviews.llvm.org/D140263) indeed. Let's revert to the original naming via this patch. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72979 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
