ReadMeFeed / Community knowledge
Real questions. Useful conversations. Find the people who know your stack.
I am building a StencilJS component and need certain reactive properties to remain internal implementation details. The @Prop decorator exposes properties through the custom element's attribute and property interface, so I want to confirm whether TypeScript's private modifier prevents them from becoming part of the public API at runtime. StencilJS has no ded
The goal is to maintain strict encapsulation of helper functions when migrating from Racket 7.0 to 8.0. In 7.0, (only-in mod id) allowed importing any top‑level binding, regardless of whether it was exported. 8.0 tightened this rule so that only identifiers explicitly exported by provide can be imported. Developers often add (provide (all-defined-out)) as a
NumPy documents a public API inventory and treats names starting with underscore and modules under numpy.core as private implementation details that may change without deprecation. The top-level package does not define a complete __all__, so from numpy import * can surface internal names and increase accidental public access. The project maintains a public A
Unintended public exposure of C symbols via @cImport in Zig Goal: Verify whether placing a @cImport block inside a pub block causes the imported C declarations to become part of the module’s public API, potentially allowing other Zig files to access them without an explicit pub qualifier. Constraints: Zig defaults to file‑private visibility; a @cImport inher
Goal Identify which pytest symbols are safe for plugins and test code to import without risk of breaking changes across minor versions. Constraints and uncertainty pytest re-exports internal symbols like FixtureRequest , Parser , and HookspecMarker at the top level without provisional markers. The official API reference documents only a subset as stable. No
stenciljs
racket
zig
pytest