It's "opcode" not "opCode".
Similarly "Opcode" not "OpCode".
This appears to be the general worldwide consensus on the matter. Other
residents of my office didn't seem to mind one way or the other how it's
spelled in our code, but for whatever reason, it really bugged me.
Change-Id: Ia0b73d19c54aefc0f543a9c9451dda22ee876a59
diff --git a/vm/compiler/codegen/arm/ArchUtility.c b/vm/compiler/codegen/arm/ArchUtility.c
index 7649300..0b76eb5 100644
--- a/vm/compiler/codegen/arm/ArchUtility.c
+++ b/vm/compiler/codegen/arm/ArchUtility.c
@@ -283,7 +283,7 @@
const bool dumpNop = false;
/* Handle pseudo-ops individually, and all regular insns as a group */
- switch(lir->opCode) {
+ switch(lir->opcode) {
case kArmChainingCellBottom:
LOGD("-------- end of chaining cells (0x%04x)\n", offset);
break;
@@ -345,9 +345,9 @@
if (lir->isNop && !dumpNop) {
break;
}
- buildInsnString(EncodingMap[lir->opCode].name, lir, opName,
+ buildInsnString(EncodingMap[lir->opcode].name, lir, opName,
baseAddr, 256);
- buildInsnString(EncodingMap[lir->opCode].fmt, lir, buf, baseAddr,
+ buildInsnString(EncodingMap[lir->opcode].fmt, lir, buf, baseAddr,
256);
LOGD("%p (%04x): %-8s%s%s\n",
baseAddr + offset, offset, opName, buf,