Decide on name for `Freeze`

[traviscross]

We still need to pick a name for Freeze (which may still be Freeze) so that we can proceed with:

• core::marker::NoCell in bounds (previously known an Freeze) rfcs#3633

Thoughts?

cc @rust-lang/lang

@rustbot labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated

[p-avital]

I'm reiterating my proposal from Zulip: keeping Freeze, and instead giving llvm's freeze a more explicit name. To quote myself from there:

I might just be misunderstanding the docs for the intrinsic, but it feels like it'd translate well to a MaybeUninit::read (as opposed to assume_init_read), or maybe deterministic_read or something alike to avoid it looking simpler than the current assume_init set

[traviscross]

Let's see whether we have consensus to simply call it Freeze.

@rfcbot fcp merge

[rfcbot]

Team member @traviscross has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members:

• @joshtriplett
• @nikomatsakis
• @pnkfelix
• @scottmcm
• @tmandry
• @traviscross

Concerns:

• should-be-self-documenting-about-interior-mutability (Decide on name for Freeze #131401 (comment))

Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

cc @rust-lang/lang-advisors: FCP proposed for lang, please feel free to register concerns.
See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.

[joshtriplett]

I'm reiterating my proposal from Zulip: keeping Freeze, and instead giving llvm's freeze a more explicit name. To quote myself from there:

I might just be misunderstanding the docs for the intrinsic, but it feels like it'd translate well to a MaybeUninit::read (as opposed to assume_init_read), or maybe deterministic_read or something alike to avoid it looking simpler than the current assume_init set

I don't know if Freeze is the best name for this trait, but I definitely agree that freeze is not the best name for the the LLVM concept.

[joshtriplett]

@rfcbot concern should-be-self-documenting-about-interior-mutability

I think we should use a name that's self-documenting and evokes the concept of interior mutability in some way.

[Scripter17]

Would Frozen work?

[Amanieu]

I'm partial to the name InteriorImmutable for the Freeze trait (which was actually one of the alternatives listed in the RFC). All of the cell-related documentation already uses the term "interior mutability" and the trait name makes it clear that it means that the type does not contain a cell.

[traviscross]

Stylistically, we don't end trait names with "-able". We have Copy and not Copyable, e.g. We just leaned on this principle in deciding to go with derive(CoercePointee) rather than various "-able" options in:

• Decide on name for derive(SmartPtr) #129104

That is, trait names imply the capability to do the thing named in the trait.

What would be the version of an "interior immutable"-style name that matches that?