From: shyouhei@... Date: 2020-05-05T06:43:16+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:98137] [Ruby master Misc#16803] Discussion: those internal macros reside in public API headers Issue #16803 has been updated by shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe). ioquatix (Samuel Williams) wrote in #note-7: > If it was me, I'd literally call it `ruby/internal/file.h` to make it very clear, along with `ruby3` -> `rb_internal_/RB_INTERNAL_` > > Assuming `impl` means implementation, it's not clear that it's private, but `internal` does mean a certain kind of private. That arrangement could be confusing when @nobu merges his https://github.com/nobu/ruby/tree/feature/src-dir branch. You should persuade him first. ---------------------------------------- Misc #16803: Discussion: those internal macros reside in public API headers https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16803#change-85379 * Author: shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- A while ago I merged https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/2991 ("Split ruby.h"). This seems working. But the changeset raised several questions. The biggest one relates to those newly publicised macros and inline functions. For instance `RUBY3_STATIC_ASSERT` is a macro that expands to either `_Static_assert` (for C) or `static_assert` (for C++). A similar mechanism has been implemented inside of our repository for a while. The pull request moved the definition around to be visible outside. #### Discussion #1 #### Is it a good idea or a bad idea, to make them visible worldwide? #### Discussion #2 #### Why not publicise everything? For instance debuggers could benefit from ruby internal symbols. #### Discussion #3 #### It is relatively hard for us to change public APIs (doing so could break 3rd party gems). We don't want that happen for internal APIs. How do we achieve future flexibility? -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: