Skip to content

Rename LifetimeName as LifetimeKind. #139770

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Rename LifetimeName as LifetimeKind. #139770

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+68 −68

Conversation

nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor

It's a much better name, more consistent with how we name such things.

Also rename Lifetime::res as Lifetime::kind to match. I suspect this field used to have the type LifetimeRes and then the type was changed but the field name remained the same.

r? @BoxyUwU

@rustbot rustbot added A-rustc-dev-guide Area: rustc-dev-guide S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Apr 13, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Apr 13, 2025

The rustc-dev-guide subtree was changed. If this PR only touches the dev guide consider submitting a PR directly to rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide otherwise thank you for updating the dev guide with your changes.

cc @BoxyUwU, @jieyouxu, @Kobzol

rust-analyzer is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/rust-analyzer instead.

cc @rust-lang/rust-analyzer

HIR ty lowering was modified

cc @fmease

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy

cc @rust-lang/clippy

@ChayimFriedman2
Copy link
Contributor

The rust-analyzer changes seems unrelated (and LifetimeName is the correct name there), did it occur by mistake?

@nnethercote nnethercote force-pushed the rename-LifetimeName branch from 6626dd7 to d9e9388 Compare April 14, 2025 03:04
@rustbot

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view
@rustbot

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view
@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor Author

The rust-analyzer changes seems unrelated (and LifetimeName is the correct name there), did it occur by mistake?

Good catch, thanks. I have removed those changes.

I also removed the unintentional cargo changes.

@BoxyUwU
Copy link
Member

BoxyUwU commented Apr 14, 2025

it seems like there are still cargo changes

@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Apr 14, 2025
@nnethercote nnethercote force-pushed the rename-LifetimeName branch 2 times, most recently from 3152ef1 to 5c27b89 Compare April 14, 2025 22:13
@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor Author

it seems like there are still cargo changes

Sorry about that, fixed now.

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Apr 14, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 15, 2025

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #139845) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@nnethercote
Rename LifetimeName as LifetimeKind.
fe882bf 
It's a much better name, more consistent with how we name such things.

Also rename `Lifetime::res` as `Lifetime::kind` to match. I suspect this
field used to have the type `LifetimeRes` and then the type was changed
but the field name remained the same.
@nnethercote nnethercote force-pushed the rename-LifetimeName branch from 5c27b89 to fe882bf Compare April 15, 2025 21:41
@nnethercote
Copy link
Contributor Author

I rebased.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU

Labels
A-rustc-dev-guide Area: rustc-dev-guide S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@nnethercote @rustbot @ChayimFriedman2 @BoxyUwU @bors