refactor(pass-style): refactor-only avoid symbol-named methods #2840
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
erights
changed the title
erights
force-pushed
the
markm-2797-refactor-only-part
branch
from
92dcebe to
dda45be
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Extracted from #2797
Closes: #XXXX
Refs: #2793 #2792
Description
This PR is the extraction from #2797 of only the safe pure refactor elements of #2797 as suggested by @kriskowal at #2797 (review) . #2797 is then rebased on this one, representing only the elements whose refactor-purity was questionable.
This PR should be a pure refactor, to avoid creating remotables with symbol-named methods when there is clearly no possible compat hazard. Non-remotable objects with symbol-named methods are fine. But see Compatibility Considerations below.
Security Considerations
none
Scaling Considerations
none
Documentation Considerations
none
Testing Considerations
Most of the remotable objects with symbol-named methods were in tests. These can clearly be fixed without any compat hazard, so I count these as pure refactors. However, in removing the symbol-ness of some of these tests, I may have accidentally removed the purposes of the tests. They might now be fully redundant with other tests and should be removed. If anyone does investigate this, that cleanup could be in a later PR.
Compatibility Considerations
none. But see Compatibility Considerations of #2797
Upgrade Considerations
none