Issue #21459 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze). jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) wrote:
I think this should allow extension libraries to start benefiting from core Set without having to resort to method calls (dangerous in an C extension as they could be redefined to return objects of an unexpected type).
What would be the danger with that? It could cause a NoMethodError or so, but that's fine. IMO rb_funcall() is enough for this, and anyway needs to be used for Ruby version < 3.5. ---------------------------------------- Feature #21459: Add Set C-API https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/21459#change-113867 * Author: jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- I would like to add a minimal C-API for Set: ```c void rb_set_foreach(VALUE set, int (*func)(VALUE element, VALUE arg), VALUE arg); VALUE rb_set_new(void); VALUE rb_set_new_capa(unsigned long capa); bool rb_set_lookup(VALUE set, VALUE element); bool rb_set_add(VALUE set, VALUE element); VALUE rb_set_clear(VALUE set); bool rb_set_delete(VALUE set, VALUE element); size_t rb_set_size(VALUE set); ``` I think this should allow extension libraries to start benefiting from core Set without having to resort to method calls (dangerous in an C extension as they could be redefined to return objects of an unexpected type). I've submitted a pull request for this: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/13735 -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/