From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: declare function/macro private Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2021 14:05:30 -0400 Message-ID: References: <0278C47F-42CE-45C4-B789-83C57DF1A191@bydasein.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40565"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: "Paul W. Rankin" To: "Paul W. Rankin" via "Emacs development discussions." Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jun 06 20:06:54 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lpxAk-000AIX-75 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 20:06:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59192 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lpxAj-0008J4-4R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 14:06:53 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50678) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lpx9W-0007Yf-26 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 14:05:38 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:39143) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lpx9S-0003C7-Mp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2021 14:05:36 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 59C801002FC; Sun, 6 Jun 2021 14:05:33 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C3E2B10019F; Sun, 6 Jun 2021 14:05:31 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1623002731; bh=+4pu5iAA9SMQlmR9s81l8JEUP1YSKYHZrNxJ55mgwjs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=M99jbPaa2msB8B6y0kqzFuV8S/0foSBDCeDkeIFoMpE4+EMqOaMwGUriwkF8jcP+7 RFCTGiKtkLBWP+7hruL0S4Fw2mDYYx/gCE9/Z+XCd6lMnTVXAwKGm1XGPMcUyxV10F omDzw1HeP7BERBEEAW8KBhDiST7EV3y29qBXQlxLY1znN8gcWN2sQHMEV3tDkNu699 kc9+AFI5uPuFzrrmqNZenn9dgUWllDTJyGbR24Q1cAk5DzhkyCq4W8xkOlJCrfrNC5 95z0reXoTEvOiG4mb1pmnbGHDpApTlYvIGL7MLvZ9igOwcFqxemWtbiiJVuV45jJnR /WUz20fnaM1uQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (69-196-163-239.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.163.239]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8F814120DA6; Sun, 6 Jun 2021 14:05:31 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <0278C47F-42CE-45C4-B789-83C57DF1A191@bydasein.com> (Paul W. Rankin's message of "Sun, 6 Jun 2021 14:27:58 +1000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:270491 Archived-At: > Of course there's already the convention of prefix--my-private-function, but What would be the difference between this convention and your proposed declaration? > my thinking here is that a program could declare a function/macro as > private, then the compiler could signal a warning/error if that function > appeared in a library outside the library it was defined and > declared private. We don't have a definition for "library", sadly. I think the "--" convention actually includes an extra information compared to yours which could be useful here: we could warn for uses of "foo--" if and only if the use appears in something whose name doesn't start with "foo-". IOW, use the string before the "--" as the definition of the "library" (so that would support cases where a library is spread over several files, as well as the case where a single file contains "internal libraries"). Of course, if we enable such a warning now, we'll get a fairly large number of warnings, I think ;-) Another advantage of the "--" convention is that you don't need to load the definition of that function in order to discover that it's private. Stefan