Prefix RefC internal names to disambiguate

[joelberkeley]

Description

Value is sufficiently vague that it can collide with names from other support libs, such as Value in my MLIR lib. I've prefixed everything with Idris2_.

c.f. zulip discussion #help > Rename `Value` in RefC?

Self-check

• If this is a fix, user-facing change, a compiler change, or a new paper
  implementation, I have updated CHANGELOG_NEXT.md
• I confirm that this contribution did not involve GenerativeAI nor Large Language Models.

[joelberkeley]

should I have updated this and other autogenerated files?

[joelberkeley]

not sure about this rename

[joelberkeley]

Do I need to do anything else here? Looks like CI timed out

[dunhamsteve]

Should we be updating the bootstrap image? I'm not sure what the policy is here, I think at one point we liked to have it be the previous version of Idris.

It looks like bootstrap-ci is wedging waiting for an ubuntu-20 runner, probably because they're deprecated. The like says they'd be down on the 8th to "raise awareness".

Evaluating initialise.if
Evaluating: success()
Result: true
Requested labels: ubuntu-20.04
Job defined at: idris-lang/Idris2/.github/workflows/ci-bootstrap.yml@refs/pull/3765/merge
Waiting for a runner to pick up this job...

If updating bootstrap is ok, we probably need to move bootstrap-ci.yml to a newer ubuntu.

[joelberkeley]

Should we be updating the bootstrap image?

I have absolutely no idea. I don't know how it works (I thought the bootstrap image would be built from whatever changes I make elsewhere), in which case the answer would be "no, we shouldn't update the bootstrap image". But I have extremely low confidence in my knowledge here.

I only updated it because it appeared in the find/replace.

[dunhamsteve]

Yeah, the bootstrap files are usually only updated for releases. I wouldn't update it unless something is broken and we're forced to update it. I believe it is only used to build a scheme target (either chez or racket), so it should be fine as-is with these changes, and we should revert those two files. That should fix the build.

Aside from that does anyone have objections to this change?

[joelberkeley]

Reverted bootstrap

[dunhamsteve]

Looks good to me, and I don't see any objections.

[joelberkeley]

p.s. bootstrap version handled in this PR #3729