On 10/26/25 9:44 AM, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > On Sun, Oct 26, 2025 at 3:40 PM Alexandre Courbot <[email protected]> wrote: ...
> Regarding the `.into_as()` name, it makes sense, but it can be a bit > surprising when reading out of context... The standalone functions are > super clear, in comparison. But I am not sure what could be better. > `into_in_this_arch()` or similar could emphasize that this will only > work in certain architectures, i.e. it is "an `into()` for this arch" > rather than the general one. > That would go well with the idea that you didn't implement it for > other obvious types, which I guess was to avoid developers using this > instead of `into()` by mistake, right? > Exactly: the into-as, from-as naming suffers from *appearing* to be familiar and readable, but actually, the naming gives no hint as to what it is really doing--nor how it is subtly different from the basic from/as/into standard conversions. Instead, we need to add something (almost anything) to the name, to make it clearly different from the from/as/into. into_for_arch() goes in that direction, for example. thanks, -- John Hubbard
