Rename Rng -> RngExt, RngCore -> Rng #1288
Closed
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
For review, as mentioned in #1273. Effects:
Rng, CryptoRng, BlockRngCore, CryptoBlockRng
. Eh, this still isn't quite right. But we havestruct BlockRng
, thus must keeptrait BlockRngCore
.Rng
and (at least sometimes)RngExt
.My opinion is now against this change:
Rng
. (In part this is because it's rarely necessary to callRngCore
methods directly; in part it's because anyR: Rng
also satisfiesR: RngCore
and vice-versa.) Now, user-code tends to use both (generics overR: Rng
and you needRngExt::gen
orRngExt::gen_range
or ..).Still, I'll leave it here in case anyone wishes to review the changes. (Note that a couple of simplifications could be made without the trait rename; e.g. replacing
R: RngCore
withR: Rng
in some places.)