Skip to content

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This comment was marked as outdated.

@rustbot

This comment was marked as outdated.

@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.

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.

@BoxyUwU
Copy link
Member

BoxyUwU commented Apr 16, 2025

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 16, 2025

📌 Commit fe882bf has been approved by BoxyUwU

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Apr 16, 2025
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2025
…=BoxyUwU

Rename `LifetimeName` as `LifetimeKind`.

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`
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2025
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 8 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#139084 (hygiene: Rename semi-transparent to semi-opaque)
 - rust-lang#139236 (Use a session counter to make anon dep nodes unique)
 - rust-lang#139650 (Fix `register_group_alias` for tools)
 - rust-lang#139770 (Rename `LifetimeName` as `LifetimeKind`.)
 - rust-lang#139846 (Remove `kw::Empty` uses in rustdoc)
 - rust-lang#139891 (Include optional dso_local marker for functions in `enum-match.rs`)
 - rust-lang#139908 (parser: Remove old diagnostic notes for type ascription syntax)
 - rust-lang#139917 (fix for multiple `#[repr(align(N))]` on functions)

Failed merges:

 - rust-lang#139615 (Remove `name_or_empty`)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 8e5df28 into rust-lang:master Apr 17, 2025
6 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.88.0 milestone Apr 17, 2025
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2025
Rollup merge of rust-lang#139770 - nnethercote:rename-LifetimeName, r=BoxyUwU

Rename `LifetimeName` as `LifetimeKind`.

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``
@nnethercote nnethercote deleted the rename-LifetimeName branch April 17, 2025 05:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-rustc-dev-guide Area: rustc-dev-guide S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants