erichkeane wrote: > > Also, we have `getIfCondMutable` in a number of places as well, which is > > now inconsistent with skipping the 'operand'. > > I am not sure I follow - are you saying that for consistency, you think that > the word 'operand' should be included in the name of `ifCond` (or excluded > for other cases)? We do have multiple cases where we do not use the word > 'operand' - for example in acc.parallel we have numGangs, numWorkers, > vectorLength, selfCond, ifCond. It is used in cases where it looks awkward to > not have it. For example `asyncOperands` and `waitOperands`. This is > subjective though :)
I guess I would like us to be consistent between all of them? I consider `ifCond` and `deviceNumOperand` to be equivalent, and `if` and `deviceNum` to be equivalent. I admit it is quite subjective, and I'm happy as long as the name of the 'same thing' is the same between constructs, but I would expect them to either consistently name that it is the argument to the clause, or the clause itself. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/136745 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
