[RFC] rename LateResourceValues to LateResources#55
Merged
homunkulus merged 2 commits intomasterfrom Dec 9, 2017
Merged
Conversation
Collaborator
Author
err, cc @jonas-schievink ^ |
jonas-schievink
approved these changes
Dec 8, 2017
Contributor
jonas-schievink
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, this makes sense to me.
Collaborator
Author
|
@homunkulus r+ |
Contributor
|
📌 Commit edca7d5 has been approved by |
Contributor
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2017
[RFC] rename LateResourceValues to LateResources After writing `LateResourceValues` several times I now think it's too long to type. I'd like that struct to be renamed to `LateResources`. I don't think there would be a loss in readability with the rename because you can think of "late resources" as resources that "don't exist" until `init` ends instead of as resources that are not initialized after `init` ends -- the second meaning maps better to `LateResourceValues`. This would be a breaking-change but we are moving to v0.3.0 due to #50 in any case. cc jonas-schievink
Contributor
|
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
Collaborator
Author
|
@homunkulus r+ |
Contributor
|
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
Contributor
|
📌 Commit edca7d5 has been approved by |
Contributor
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2017
[RFC] rename LateResourceValues to LateResources After writing `LateResourceValues` several times I now think it's too long to type. I'd like that struct to be renamed to `LateResources`. I don't think there would be a loss in readability with the rename because you can think of "late resources" as resources that "don't exist" until `init` ends instead of as resources that are not initialized after `init` ends -- the second meaning maps better to `LateResourceValues`. This would be a breaking-change but we are moving to v0.3.0 due to #50 in any case. cc jonas-schievink
edca7d5 to
512091e
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
@homunkulus r+ |
Contributor
|
📌 Commit 512091e has been approved by |
Contributor
japaric
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 9, 2017
[RFC] rename LateResourceValues to LateResources After writing `LateResourceValues` several times I now think it's too long to type. I'd like that struct to be renamed to `LateResources`. I don't think there would be a loss in readability with the rename because you can think of "late resources" as resources that "don't exist" until `init` ends instead of as resources that are not initialized after `init` ends -- the second meaning maps better to `LateResourceValues`. This would be a breaking-change but we are moving to v0.3.0 due to #50 in any case. cc jonas-schievink
Contributor
|
☀️ Test successful - status-travis |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
After writing
LateResourceValuesseveral times I now think it's too long to type. I'd like thatstruct to be renamed to
LateResources. I don't think there would be a loss in readability with therename because you can think of "late resources" as resources that "don't exist" until
initendsinstead of as resources that are not initialized after
initends -- the second meaning maps betterto
LateResourceValues.This would be a breaking-change but we are moving to v0.3.0 due to #50 in any case.
cc jonas-schievink