Re: Is it time to remove INTERNAL_FIELD?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>,  address@hidden
> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 13:14:09 -0400
> 
> > Why is it preferred to type BVAR (foo, name) instead of foo->name?
> 
> I can't remember the original motivation, but the basic idea is that
> BVAR may (at some point) expand to more code, to handle the fact that
> maybe this info can sometimes be stored elsewhere.

The question is do we still want to be able to detect direct
references to these fields?  If we do, we should keep the trailing
underscores, I think.