Roslyn: Naming codestyles should handle local functions

[jcouv]

The screenshot below shows the list of specifications we currently support.
Can we add local functions?

FYI @kuhlenh @sharwell @agocke

[kuhlenh]

@jcouv @dpoeschl Lots of people have asked for local variable support for naming. Do we think local functions would have different style than other locals'?

[sharwell]

@kuhlenh I typically name local functions in PascalCase, as opposed to other locals in camelCase.

[kuhlenh]

@sharwell so treat local functions like methods? I'm just trying to figure out if there really is a need to call local functions out separately, or if we set the style to match locals or methods.

[jcouv]

In compiler code, we use PascalCase for methods, but so far we've used camelCase for local functions. The IDE code uses PascalCase even for local functions.

[jcouv]

I've been thinking about this more. Maybe we wouldn't introduce a naming code style for local functions, but rather introduce one for locals (which local functions would be one of).

[CyrusNajmabadi]

but rather introduce one for locals (which local functions would be one of).

I'm not sure i would like that. I use camelCase for locals, but PascalCase for local methods :)

[Neme12]

I think it's clear from this discussion that we need a separate rule :smile:

[Neme12]

A style for tuple element names would also be useful.

[Neme12]

@sharwell Please reopen, local functions are still not handled (only PR for locals was merged).