Cleanup: Consistently use Param instead of Arg

[Centril]

For example, ideally fn visit_arg would be named fn visit_param since this is about formal parameters (in function signatures and from the POV inside the function body) instead of actual arguments (the values you pass to functions).

The type Arg should probably be named Param.

(This is not an exhaustive list, there are other places "arg" is used not mentioned here that should probably use "param" instead)

cc @petrochenkov @c410-f3r
cc #61856

This issue has been assigned to @kper via this comment.

[kper]

Can I work on this?

[rustbot]

Error: Only Rust team members can assign other users

Please let @rust-lang/release know if you're having trouble with this bot.

[csmoe]

@kper you can assign to yourself with @rustbot claim.

[kper]

@rustbot kper

[csmoe]

@kper it's already "assign"ed to you.

[kper]

I tried to begin with the renaming and I have been wondering how aggressive I should rename? It is kind of hard for me to see when I have real arguments or parameters. My first try (Commit 6c9051c as referenced above) led to extremely a lot of change. Can I have some feedback?

In addition, I noticed that the issue has a "blocked" label. Should I therefore wait until #61856 is finished?

[Centril]

Should I therefore wait until #61856 is finished?

I think that's a good idea.

It is kind of hard for me to see when I have real arguments or parameters. My first try (Commit 6c9051c as referenced above) led to extremely a lot of change. Can I have some feedback?

This looks largely right, tho I didn't look at parser.rs. In general, if something refers to things a function accepts rather than the expressions (or types when it's about type args) passed into them, then they are parameters and not arguments.

Please also avoid running rustfmt on the code as that will make everyone else have to rebase and it makes it harder to review the actual changes.

[c410-f3r]

#61856 has been merged

[kper]

@Centril can you look over my commit? :)

[Centril]

@kper Can you file it as a PR? Easier to review that way.

[kper]

@Centril sure :)