Remove leading underscore from private fields #354
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
Signed-off-by: Luca Della Vedova <lucadv@intrinsic.ai>
mxgrey
approved these changes
Dec 5, 2023
esteve
approved these changes
Dec 5, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In my previous contributions I used the convention of leading underscores for private fields of struct, however this convention is:
A) Not used anywhere else in the codebase, so it is a disconnect.
B) Actively harmful in Rust since it suppresses unused variable warnings.
This PR is just a bit of hygiene to remove that convention and conform to the normal snake_case names that are used throughout the codebase.
Note that one in particular has been left for now in storage for parameter constraints / description as shown in ce2c502. The value is currently unused but will stop being so when parameter services are implemented #342