Skip to content

Conversation

@sidlamsal
Copy link

Fixes #56497

@sidlamsal
Copy link
Author

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

@sidlamsal sidlamsal marked this pull request as ready for review February 18, 2025 19:26
@jakebailey
Copy link
Member

This PR says it fixes #56497, but that's not entirely the case; #56497 is asking for rename to not introduce foo as foo at all, whereas this PR adds a new suggestion that complains about foo as foo. That's a fine suggestion, but I would expect a PR that fixes #56497 to fix rename, and IIRC there's something odd about the way renaming works that may prevent that from working (but I can't remember what it was; I've wanted to fix this issue previously but gave up due to some issue...).

@sidlamsal
Copy link
Author

@jakebailey, understood. I came to a similar conclusion when trying to get rename to not include the redundancy. Would it be acceptable to create a new issue to close via this PR? Because, this PR has a lightweight band-aid "fix" for a non code-breaking bug. If not, do you have any insight/suggestion on fixing rename itself?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Rename symbol command] Remove unnecessary named import

3 participants