refactor(gnovm): rename gnovm InterfaceType property Method to FieldTypes and allocator Allocate to Account

[audrenbdb]

Addresses following issue: #4794

Rename Allocator.Allocate to Allocator.Account to reflect that the method only performs memory accounting — it does not perform Go runtime allocation.

Rename InterfaceType.Methods (type []FieldType) to FieldTypes to reflect that the slice can contain both methods and embedded interfaces, not only methods.

[Gno2D2]

🛠 PR Checks Summary

All Automated Checks passed. ✅

Manual Checks (for Reviewers):

• IGNORE the bot requirements for this PR (force green CI check)
• The pull request description provides enough details

Read More

🤖 This bot helps streamline PR reviews by verifying automated checks and providing guidance for contributors and reviewers.

✅ Automated Checks (for Contributors):

🟢 Maintainers must be able to edit this pull request (more info)
🟢 Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

☑️ Contributor Actions:

1. Fix any issues flagged by automated checks.
2. Follow the Contributor Checklist to ensure your PR is ready for review.
   • Add new tests, or document why they are unnecessary.
   • Provide clear examples/screenshots, if necessary.
   • Update documentation, if required.
   • Ensure no breaking changes, or include BREAKING CHANGE notes.
   • Link related issues/PRs, where applicable.

☑️ Reviewer Actions:

1. Complete manual checks for the PR, including the guidelines and additional checks if applicable.

📚 Resources:

• Report a bug with the bot.
• View the bot’s configuration file.

Debug

Automated Checks

Maintainers must be able to edit this pull request (more info)

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 And
    ├── 🟢 The base branch matches this pattern: ^master$
    └── 🟢 The pull request was created from a fork (head branch repo: audrenbdb/gno)

Then

🟢 Requirement satisfied
└── 🟢 Maintainer can modify this pull request

Pending initial approval by a review team member, or review from tech-staff

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 And
    ├── 🟢 The base branch matches this pattern: ^master$
    └── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is a member of the team: tech-staff)

Then

🟢 Requirement satisfied
└── 🟢 If
    ├── 🟢 Condition
    │   └── 🟢 Or
    │       ├── 🔴 At least one of these user(s) reviewed the pull request: [jefft0 leohhhn n0izn0iz notJoon omarsy x1unix] (with state "APPROVED")
    │       ├── 🟢 At least 1 user(s) of the team tech-staff reviewed pull request
    │       └── 🔴 This pull request is a draft
    └── 🟢 Then
        └── 🟢 Not (🔴 This label is applied to pull request: review/triage-pending)

Manual Checks

**IGNORE** the bot requirements for this PR (force green CI check)

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 On every pull request

Can be checked by

• Any user with comment edit permission

The pull request description provides enough details

If

🟢 Condition met
└── 🟢 And
    ├── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is a member of the team: core-contributors)
    └── 🟢 Not (🔴 Pull request author is user: dependabot[bot])

Can be checked by

• team core-contributors

[ltzmaxwell]

thank you for handling this. please see comment: #4794 (comment)

[ltzmaxwell]

seems in consistent with the func name.

[audrenbdb]

You right I missed this one, I think the function could be simply GetMethodFieldType => GetFieldType

What do you think ?

[audrenbdb]

As part of the same PR, do you think I should also rename methods to something else in:

gnovm/pkg/gnolang/nodes.go:704

type InterfaceTypeExpr struct {
	Attributes
	Methods FieldTypeExprs // list of methods
	Generic Name           // for uverse generics
}

[ltzmaxwell]

GetMethodFieldType => GetFieldType

looks good to me.

As part of the same PR, do you think I should also rename methods to something else in:

gnovm/pkg/gnolang/nodes.go:704

i think yes.

==========================================================
looking back to the InterfaceType, StructType, StructValue definition, i think there's some inaccurate in modification of Methods - > FieldTypes, perhaps Fields would be a better option—especially if we consider that Methods may not be entirely accurate due to embedding situation.

Overall, these are minor differences. I don’t have a strong opinion about changing the name due to the reason mentioned in the initial issue.

cc :/ @thehowl @mvertes for deeper insights.

[mvertes]

I agree with the rename of Allocator.Allocate to Allocator.Account.
But I'm not convinced that InterfaceType.FieldTypes is better that InterfaceType.Methods. Even if objects implementing an interface have embedded structs to reach a particular method, interface types are still about methods only.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 76.47059% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
gnovm/pkg/gnolang/realm.go	60.00%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
gnovm/pkg/gnolang/types.go	87.50%	1 Missing ⚠️
gnovm/tests/stdlibs/fmt/print.go	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!