Re: [ARI] Remove all editCase warnings

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>]

I agree that this is one of these ARI rules which bring little benefit.
Or perhaps it was meant to catch CamelCase names rather than any
uppercase letter in function names? In any case, here are my 2 cents...


> > >         * ia64-tdep.c (slotN_contents): Rename to...
> > >         (slotn_contents): ...this.
> > >         (replace_slotN_contents): Rename to...
> > >         (replace_slotn_contents): ...this.
> > 
> > No comments.  But I bet whoever wrote this was well aware
> > of our coding conventions and still chose an uppercase N.

Wow, the file was introduced in March 2000, it's 10 years old!
In any case, it was introduced by Kevin Buettner.

If I was the author, I'd have no preference over N or n. But if we
change it to n, can we add an underscore? slot_n_contents and
replace_slot_n_contents? I think that will be slightly easier
to read...

>   - splay_compare_CORE_ADDR_ptr in addrmap.c
> there are numerous other functions refereeing to CORE_ADDR type without
> using uppercase:

It's fine to change it to splay_compare_core_addr_ptr AFAIAC.

>   - the other two are
> proc_get_LDT_entry and procfs_find_LDT_entry in procfs.c
> 
> these two functions are only called by 
> ps_lgetLDT inside sol-thread.c, which is, according to the comment
> required by libthread_db solaris library. 
>   But I do not know if this also justifies propagating the uppercase use
> to the called functions in procfs.c

No preference on my end.  We probably already have some routines that
use lowercase accronyms, so it wouldn't be something new. But it would
be fine to tolerate the use of uppercase accronyms too (IMO).

-- 
Joel