Update name-resolution.md

Author: Tbkhi

src/name-resolution.md

@@ -2,32 +2,35 @@
 
 <!-- toc -->
 
-In the previous chapters, we saw how the AST is built with all macros expanded.
-We saw how doing that requires doing some name resolution to resolve imports
-and macro names. In this chapter, we show how this is actually done and more.
+In the previous chapters, we saw how the [*Abstract Syntax Tree* (`AST`)][ast]
+is built with all `macros` expanded. We saw how doing that requires doing some
+name resolution to resolve imports and `macro` names. In this chapter, we show
+how this is actually done and more.
 
-In fact, we don't do full name resolution during macro expansion -- we only
-resolve imports and macros at that time. This is required to know what to even
-expand. Later, after we have the whole AST, we do full name resolution to
+[ast]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_syntax_tree
+
+In fact, we don't do full name resolution during `macro` expansion -- we only
+resolve imports and `macros` at that time. This is required to know what to even
+expand. Later, after we have the whole `AST`, we do full name resolution to
 resolve all names in the crate. This happens in [`rustc_resolve::late`][late].
-Unlike during macro expansion, in this late expansion, we only need to try to
+Unlike during `macro` expansion, in this late expansion, we only need to try to
 resolve a name once, since no new names can be added. If we fail to resolve a
-name now, then it is a compiler error.
-
-Name resolution can be complex. There are a few different namespaces (e.g.
-macros, values, types, lifetimes), and names may be valid at different (nested)
-scopes. Also, different types of names can fail to be resolved differently, and
-failures can happen differently at different scopes. For example, for a module
-scope, failure means no unexpanded macros and no unresolved glob imports in
-that module. On the other hand, in a function body, failure requires that a
+name, then it is a compiler error.
+
+Name resolution can be complex. There are different namespaces (e.g.
+`macros`, values, types, lifetimes), and names may be valid at different (nested)
+scopes. Also, different types of names can fail resolution differently, and
+failures can happen differently at different scopes. For example, in a module
+scope, failure means no unexpanded `macros` and no unresolved glob imports in
+that module. On the other hand, in a function body scope, failure requires that a
 name be absent from the block we are in, all outer scopes, and the global
 scope.
 
 [late]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/late/index.html
 
 ## Basics
 
-In our programs we can refer to variables, types, functions, etc, by giving them
+In our programs we refer to variables, types, functions, etc, by giving them
 a name. These names are not always unique. For example, take this valid Rust
 program:
 
@@ -37,38 +40,39 @@ let x: x = 1;
 let y: x = 2;
 ```
 
-How do we know on line 3 whether `x` is a type (u32) or a value (1)? These
+How do we know on line 3 whether `x` is a type (`u32`) or a value (1)? These
 conflicts are resolved during name resolution. In this specific case, name
 resolution defines that type names and variable names live in separate
 namespaces and therefore can co-exist.
 
 The name resolution in Rust is a two-phase process. In the first phase, which runs
-during macro expansion, we build a tree of modules and resolve imports. Macro
+during `macro` expansion, we build a tree of modules and resolve imports. Macro
 expansion and name resolution communicate with each other via the
 [`ResolverAstLoweringExt`] trait.
 
 The input to the second phase is the syntax tree, produced by parsing input
-files and expanding macros. This phase produces links from all the names in the
+files and expanding `macros`. This phase produces links from all the names in the
 source to relevant places where the name was introduced. It also generates
-helpful error messages, like typo suggestions, traits to import or lints about
+helpful error messages, like typo suggestions, `trait`s to import or lints about
 unused items.
 
 A successful run of the second phase ([`Resolver::resolve_crate`]) creates kind
 of an index the rest of the compilation may use to ask about the present names
 (through the `hir::lowering::Resolver` interface).
 
-The name resolution lives in the `rustc_resolve` crate, with the meat in
+The name resolution lives in the [`rustc_resolve`] crate, with the bulk in
 `lib.rs` and some helpers or symbol-type specific logic in the other modules.
 
 [`Resolver::resolve_crate`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/struct.Resolver.html#method.resolve_crate
 [`ResolverAstLoweringExt`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_ast_lowering/trait.ResolverAstLoweringExt.html
+[`rustc_resolve`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/index.html
 
 ## Namespaces
 
 Different kind of symbols live in different namespaces ‒ e.g. types don't
 clash with variables. This usually doesn't happen, because variables start with
-lower-case letter while types with upper case one, but this is only a
-convention. This is legal Rust code that'll compile (with warnings):
+lower-case letter while types with upper-case one, but this is only a
+convention. This is legal Rust code that will compile (with warnings):
 
 ```rust
 type x = u32;
@@ -81,33 +85,37 @@ namespaces, the resolver keeps them separated and builds separate structures for
 them.
 
 In other words, when the code talks about namespaces, it doesn't mean the module
-hierarchy, it's types vs. values vs. macros.
+hierarchy, it's types vs. values vs. `macros`.
 
 ## Scopes and ribs
 
 A name is visible only in certain area in the source code. This forms a
 hierarchical structure, but not necessarily a simple one ‒ if one scope is
-part of another, it doesn't mean the name visible in the outer one is also
-visible in the inner one, or that it refers to the same thing.
+part of another, it doesn't mean a name visible in the outer scope is also
+visible in the inner scope, or that it refers to the same thing.
 
-To cope with that, the compiler introduces the concept of Ribs. This is
+To cope with that, the compiler introduces the concept of [`Rib`]s. This is
 an abstraction of a scope. Every time the set of visible names potentially changes,
-a new rib is pushed onto a stack. The places where this can happen include for
+a new [`Rib`] is pushed onto a stack. The places where this can happen include for
 example:
 
+[`Rib`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/late/struct.Rib.html
+
 * The obvious places ‒ curly braces enclosing a block, function boundaries,
   modules.
-* Introducing a let binding ‒ this can shadow another binding with the same
+* Introducing a `let` binding ‒ this can shadow another binding with the same
   name.
-* Macro expansion border ‒ to cope with macro hygiene.
+* Macro expansion border ‒ to cope with `macro` hygiene.
 
-When searching for a name, the stack of ribs is traversed from the innermost
+When searching for a name, the stack of [`ribs`] is traversed from the innermost
 outwards. This helps to find the closest meaning of the name (the one not
-shadowed by anything else). The transition to outer rib may also affect
-what names are usable ‒ if there are nested functions (not closures),
+shadowed by anything else). The transition to outer [`Rib`] may also affect
+what names are usable ‒ if there are nested functions (not `closure`s),
 the inner one can't access parameters and local bindings of the outer one,
 even though they should be visible by ordinary scoping rules. An example:
 
+[`ribs`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/late/struct.LateResolutionVisitor.html#structfield.ribs
+
 ```rust
 fn do_something<T: Default>(val: T) { // <- New rib in both types and values (1)
     // `val` is accessible, as is the helper function
@@ -126,45 +134,49 @@ fn do_something<T: Default>(val: T) { // <- New rib in both types and values (1)
 ```
 
 Because the rules for different namespaces are a bit different, each namespace
-has its own independent rib stack that is constructed in parallel to the others.
-In addition, there's also a rib stack for local labels (e.g. names of loops or
+has its own independent [`Rib`] stack that is constructed in parallel to the others.
+In addition, there's also a [`Rib`] stack for local labels (e.g. names of loops or
 blocks), which isn't a full namespace in its own right.
 
 ## Overall strategy
 
 To perform the name resolution of the whole crate, the syntax tree is traversed
 top-down and every encountered name is resolved. This works for most kinds of
-names, because at the point of use of a name it is already introduced in the Rib
+names, because at the point of use of a name it is already introduced in the [`Rib`]
 hierarchy.
 
 There are some exceptions to this. Items are bit tricky, because they can be
 used even before encountered ‒ therefore every block needs to be first scanned
-for items to fill in its Rib.
+for items to fill in its [`Rib`].
 
 Other, even more problematic ones, are imports which need recursive fixed-point
-resolution and macros, that need to be resolved and expanded before the rest of
+resolution and `macros`, that need to be resolved and expanded before the rest of
 the code can be processed.
 
 Therefore, the resolution is performed in multiple stages.
 
 ## Speculative crate loading
 
-To give useful errors, rustc suggests importing paths into scope if they're
+To give useful errors, `rustc` suggests importing paths into scope if they're
 not found. How does it do this? It looks through every module of every crate
 and looks for possible matches. This even includes crates that haven't yet
 been loaded!
 
-Loading crates for import suggestions that haven't yet been loaded is called
-_speculative crate loading_, because any errors it encounters shouldn't be
-reported: resolve decided to load them, not the user. The function that does
-this is `lookup_import_candidates` and lives in
-`rustc_resolve/src/diagnostics.rs`.
+Eagerly loading crates to include import suggestions that haven't yet been
+loaded is called _speculative crate loading_, because any errors it encounters
+shouldn't be reported: [`rustc_resolve`] decided to load them, not the user. The function
+that does this is [`lookup_import_candidates`] and lives in
+[`rustc_resolve::diagnostics`].
+
+[`rustc_resolve`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/index.html
+[`lookup_import_candidates`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/struct.Resolver.html#method.lookup_import_candidates
+[`rustc_resolve::diagnostics`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_resolve/diagnostics/index.html
 
 To tell the difference between speculative loads and loads initiated by the
-user, resolve passes around a `record_used` parameter, which is `false` when
+user, [`rustc_resolve`] passes around a `record_used` parameter, which is `false` when
 the load is speculative.
 
-## TODO: [#16](https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/issues/16)
+<!-- ## TODO: [#16](https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/issues/16)
 
 This is a result of the first pass of learning the code. It is definitely
 incomplete and not detailed enough. It also might be inaccurate in places.
@@ -178,4 +190,4 @@ Still, it probably provides useful first guidepost to what happens in there.
 * The overall strategy description is a bit vague.
 * Where does the name `Rib` come from?
 * Does this thing have its own tests, or is it tested only as part of some e2e
-  testing?
+  testing? -->