Hello and happy 2013,
Would anyone object to renaming MCInstFragment to MCRelaxableFragment?
I believe the latter expresses this class's purpose much more clearly
and avoids the confusion with MCDataFragments which also contains
instructions.
Eli
I guess that is OK, but wouldn't it be better to also rename
MCDataFragments then?
I don't know what a more suitable name would be. Any ideas?
Eli
I don't know what a more suitable name would be. Any ideas?
I initially thought MCRelaxedFragment would go well with
MCRelaxableFragment, since a MCRelaxableFragment is merged into a
MCRelaxedFragment once we are done relaxing it.
The problem is that both names are really similar.
Eli
Cheers,
Rafael
Yes, having two such similar names would definitely be confusing. An
additional problem with MCRelaxedFragment is that it's used for
completely relaxation-unrelated things like .data and .byte, where
MCDataFragment actually makes sense. To conclude, I think that leaving
MCDataFragment named as it is isn't a bad option for now; it can
always be renamed if we come up with a better name in the future.
Eli