On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 10:49 AM Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 4:41 PM Tamir Duberstein <tamird@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > This needs an update given Miguel's comments on the cover letter. I > > wonder if the code should also justify the choice (over cbindgen). > > `cbindgen` is a longer term thing and more complex, assuming we use it > in the end, so I think it is fine going with this for the time being > -- it is straightforward and a net improvement. > > Later on, if needed, we can just make `export` a no-op, right? > > It may also be useful to have the exports "explicitly tagged" this way. Sounds reasonable. I was suggesting that we document the rationale - not that we change the decision.
