Rename cstrs to constraints to distinguish from cstrs = constructors #14141
+3,273
−3,256
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
See also: #13856 (comment) |
|
This is clearly an improvement to my eyes.
My understanding is that nowadays |
|
Nice, I've modified the parsetree as well. I will try to find any other instances and then mark the PR as ready for review |
And here I thought that @nojb had transcended to a higher plane of existence where variable naming does not matter anymore... I agree this is a clear improvement. |
nojb
added
parsetree-change
|
(The CI failure seems unrelated to the changes here.) |
|
Should we merge this one? |
|
Yes, as soon as the CI passes. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently, the compiler codebase uses
cstrfor constructor andcstrsfor both constraints and constructors.This is both confusing and makes it difficult to search the code (see below for an example of confusion).
This PR renames any instances of
cstrsthat refer to constraints toconstraints, and leaves any references to constructors alone. The parsetree is not modified, since I gather that this is more complicated.In
typing/typdecl.ml, we have some example wherecstrsis used for both constructors and constraints. For example, in the functiontransl_declaration, we alternate between usingcstrsto refer to constraints and constructors.