Closed BoxyUwU closed 10 months ago
This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.
cc @rust-lang/types
@rustbot second
This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.
cc @rust-lang/types
yeet
@rustbot second
Should this be considered accepted? the "second" comment was 2 months ago
Yeah it should lol
Proposal
I would like to rename:
RegionKind::EarlyBound
toRegionKind::EarlyParam
RegionKind::Free
toRegionKind::LateParam
RegionKind::LateBound
toRegionKind::Bound
I find this to be far more consistent with
TyKind
/ConstKind
. It's taken me a while for it to properly stick what all the 3 variants are onRegionKind
since they're so differently named thanTyKind
, and also have an entire extra variant for representing lifetime parameters. I think the meaning ofRegionKind::Free
would have been a lot clearer withRegionKind::LateParam
.I also think it's kind of confusing that
RegionKind::EarlyBound
gets used for early bound generic paramaters but we do not useRegionKind::LateBound
for late bound generic parameters. I think its unnecessarily confusing to draw a parallel betweenReLateBound
/ReEarlyBound
and the concept of late/early bound generic parameters so directly when it does not actually apply. I am comfortable with drawing the parallel betweenEarlyParam
/LateParam
since it does not actually say Early/Late bound and in this case the parallel is actually present.I would also like to avoid drawing a similarity between generic parameters and bound vars right now since we do not actually represent params with bound vars right now (and if we did we'd have to rename
RegionKind::LateBound
toRegionKind::Bound
anyway).Renaming
EarlyBound
/Free
is it a bit of a wasted effort if we end up removing them in favor of placeholders and boundvars but this seems really simple to do wheras it's probably more complex to replace our param representation with bound vars as was briefly discussed in the t-types meeting on early/late bound parameters.I do not work with regions very much since I don't touch borrowck much. I'd feel much more comfortable if someone who has spent a fair amount of time working with regions would approve this or say this is a coherent naming scheme for the regions.
Mentors or Reviewers
I can review this or implement this or mentor this. I think really anybody on t-compiler-contributors or t-types is qualified to do any of those 3 things.
Process
The main points of the Major Change Process are as follows:
@rustbot second
.-C flag
, then full team check-off is required.@rfcbot fcp merge
on either the MCP or the PR.You can read more about Major Change Proposals on forge.
Comments
This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that. Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.