-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 386
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Standardise WrapperLookup params and fields to "registries" #3956
Conversation
Some old more descriptive names like `nonReloadables`, `first`/`second`, `fullRegistry` and `base`/`patches` were retained.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Overall a welcome change! However, searching for ARG \d registryLookup
reveals further untouched entries. Have you left them as-is intentionally or have you simply missed them? Long-term we should let Name Proposal handle this via default parameter names attached to the corresponding class mappings.
I used MIO to look at all I excluded lambdas/synthetics to avoid name clashes with the enclosing context just in case - that's where some of them come from. I'll fix this.
|
The PR now has all existing WrapperLookup params and new params for all missing non-synthetic cases. I excluded the synthetic ones since it'd also include mapping invisible capture params for lambdas. |
Note: I think for block/item/etc registry it makes sense to use I am neutral on |
Yeah, I agree on registries benefitting from the suffix. I used |
nonReloadables
,first
/second
,fullRegistry
andbase
/patches
were retained.MatrixStack
is sort of already covered under the collection rules). It would just lead to refactors likeregistry, blockRegistry -> blocks
, which are out of scope here. 😅