Change From<&str> to From<&'static str> for Name

[bytemuck]

Objective

• Fixes Name::from<&str> always heap-allocates which is a footgun #24465

Solution

• Changed impl From<&str> for Name to impl From<&'static str> for Name

Testing

• The only place it is (the From<&str> implementation) used is on this test, line 1752, which still passes:

  bevy/crates/bevy_animation/src/lib.rs

  Lines 1722 to 1762 in 5d5e3f9

  	fn test_animation_target_id() {
  	let paths = &[
  	vec![],
  	vec![""],
  	vec!["", ""],
  	vec!["a"],
  	vec!["a", "a"],
  	vec!["a", "b"],
  	vec!["b", "a"],
  	vec!["aa"],
  	vec!["ab"],
  	vec!["ba"],
  	vec!["abc"],
  	vec!["a", "b", "c"],
  	vec!["ab", "c"],
  	vec!["a", "bc"],
  	];
  	// Test that different paths map to a different `AnimationTargetId`.
  	for (li, lp) in paths.iter().enumerate() {
  	for rp in paths.iter().skip(li + 1) {
  	let lt = AnimationTargetId::from_iter(lp.iter());
  	let rt = AnimationTargetId::from_iter(rp.iter());
  	assert!(lt != rt, "{:?} and {:?} collided. {:?} ", lp, rp, lt);
  	}
  	}
  	// Test that `from_iter` is equivalent to `from_names`.
  	for str_path in paths {
  	let name_path = str_path.iter().map(|&s| Name::from(s)).collect::<Vec<_>>();
  	assert_eq!(
  	AnimationTargetId::from_iter(str_path),
  	AnimationTargetId::from_names(name_path.iter()),
  	"{:?} {:?}",
  	str_path,
  	name_path
  	);
  	}
  	}

[mardzie]

Looks great to me.

[SkiFire13]

Note that this is a breaking change, so it should be documented in the migration guide.

[bytemuck]

Note that this is a breaking change, so it should be documented in the migration guide.

Is worth to have both impl From<&str> for Name and impl From<&'static str> for Name ?

[github-actions]

It looks like your PR is a breaking change, but you didn't provide a migration guide.

Please review the instructions for writing migration guides, then expand or revise the content in the migration guides directory to reflect your changes.

[SkiFire13]

Is worth to have both impl From<&str> for Name and impl From<&'static str> for Name ?

You cannot have both, they conflict with each other. Doing something different when a lifetime is 'static is exactly where specialization breaks, so even with that it would not be possible to do this.

[bytemuck]

Is worth to have both impl From<&str> for Name and impl From<&'static str> for Name ?

You cannot have both, they conflict with each other. Doing something different when a lifetime is 'static is exactly where specialization breaks, so even with that it would not be possible to do this.

Thank you for the explanation, I'll do the migration guide since this is a breaking change.