Re: Is it time to remove INTERNAL_FIELD?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Cc: Oleh Krehel <address@hidden>, address@hidden, address@hidden
> Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2015 10:28:02 -0400
> 
> > I'd like to know as well.  So far no one objected to leaving the
> > trailing underscores for the sake of the concurrency branch.  So
> > unless someone does come up with objections soon, I'd interpret that
> > as meaning that BVAR and KVAR should still append the underscore, and
> > the fields marked INTERNAL till today should have that underscore.
> 
> I'm not opposed to removing INTERNAL_FIELD and wouldn't oppose removing
> the underscore either.  But if Eli wants to keep either of them that's
> fine by me as well.

Unless the concurrency branch is officially and finally dead, I'd like
to keep the underscores, to make it easier to revive that branch, if
and when some volunteer emerges.

> The only problem I have with this is the fact that we're just going
> back&forth on this.

We didn't yet get back on this, except in the
scratch/remove-internal-field branch.