Rename ...Uop... to ...UOp... (uppercase O) for consistency #112327
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
+1 for "UOp"! |
aisk
pushed a commit
to aisk/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 11, 2024
…12327) * Rename _PyUopExecute to _PyUOpExecute (uppercase O) for consistency * Also rename _PyUopName and _PyUOp_Replacements, and some output strings
Glyphack
pushed a commit
to Glyphack/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 2, 2024
…12327) * Rename _PyUopExecute to _PyUOpExecute (uppercase O) for consistency * Also rename _PyUopName and _PyUOp_Replacements, and some output strings
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We have
_PyUOpExecutor_Type,_PyUOpOptimizer_Type,_PyUOpExecutorObject, all spelled usingUOp(*). But we also have_PyUopExecute,_PyUopName, and_PyUOp_Replacements, all usingUop.I propose to rename the latter to use
UOp, for consistency.Alternatively, we could consistently use
Uop. The diff size would be more or less the same. But I don't care as long as we're consistent. (Well, actually, I'd rather typeUop, but, meh.)(Motivation for wanting consistency: I use case-sensitive search by default in most cases, so I get bitten by the difference regularly. And I don't want to switch to searching case insensitively, because usually I know the exact symbol I'm looking for and case insensitivity just gives me more false positives.)
(*) I.e., Micro Opcode, where 'u' is commonly used as an ASCII substitute for the greek letter mu, which in turn is often used to mean "micro".