OP Here. Yes, now I agree with you that doing a “Replace All” on lifetime with another term does not really solve the problem. (I have replied you on the RFC di

OP Here. Yes, now I agree with you that doing a “Replace All” on lifetime with another term does not really solve the problem. (I have replied you on the RFC discussion.) We need to distinguish some existing lifetime-related terms (concepts) clearly, including the two you just mentioned. The issue is &'a is so common in Rust code. We simply call it lifetime 'a, which is misleading. It is not any object’s or pointer’s lifetime, but a set of lifetime requirements (or lifetime bound in your term) that every borrower imposes on the borrowed resources. It is the B I mentioned in the last section of my blog post:   When we talk about borrow, there are three different kinds of “lifetime” involved:   A: the lifetime of the resource owner (or the owned/borrowed resource)   B: the “lifetime” of the whole borrow, i.e. from the first borrow to the last return   C: the lifetime of an individual borrower or borrowed pointer The required condition is A >= B, where B = C1 U C2 U ... U Cn.