Looks like Base.modules_warned_for no longer exists in 1.8? I can’t find it mentioned in the news. What’s the status please and what’s the recommended way for replacing it?

That was an unexported, undocumented internal variable - they’re not guaranteed to be around in any version. It got removed here: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/42822

A lightweight way to improve on what already exists would be: Exported-public - anything exported is deemed public Private - anything not exported is deemed private by default Not-exported public - need a keyword or macro to mark entities as not exported but are part of the API. That means the d…

Python at least has more of a culture and tooling (linters, etc.) to support the idea of private methods and attributes. Just one example: Some linters will require you to document a method unless it starts with _. The same convention is sometimes used in Julia. But, it’s much less widespread, and …

One thing I can fully agree on is that it sucks when someone contributes code and your library breaks a year later because they snuck in an undocumented internal Base method to make something work but didn’t make a note or add a check to the tests. It makes sense to want some guard against that beyo…

[image] Sukera: PkgEval is already run for every package in existence before a release and if your package is found to break due to a change in API, you will get notified/the change will be reverted (depending on severity). Thats’s the first time I hear about this notifications thing. Whats’s…

[image] aplavin: Thats’s the first time I hear about this notifications thing. Whats’s the notification mechanism, and how to opt into it? No need for opt in. Last I checked, it was either an issue in your repo, or a revert of the offending change in Base, provided it was an accidental API br…

[image] Benny: it sucks when someone contributes code and your library breaks a year later because they snuck in an undocumented internal Base method Possibly, but note that in this particular case, @essenciary himself introduced this code. To some extent, this whole discussion is not unlike …

[image] Tamas_Papp: To some extent, this whole discussion is not unlike complaining about missing toes after purchasing, loading, and firing a footgun, that had FOOTGUN printed on it in large block letters. @Tamas_Papp as already mentioned, it’s a generic discussion about methodology and the …

Proposed breaking changes to the language’s design aside, what does Base.modules_warned_for even do? The most I could figure out is Base.modules_warned_for == Set{Base.PkgId}(). Any chance the removed code is simple enough to be repurposed for your package’s own internal code? Seems a bit like plagi…

It does seem like an odd internal to depend on. It was there as a state tracker to avoid warning about broken package resolves multiple times in some code that was put in place to ween users onto routinely using environments. It didn’t actually work in a lot of cases due to precompilation warnings h…

Base.modules_warned_for silently removed in 1.8

General Usage

ericphanson June 9, 2022, 12:25pm 97

You can also add a PkgEval badge to your readme if you want: ANN: Nanosoldier package evaluation -- with badges!

Topic		Replies	Views
A kind of "two language problem" in Julia Ecosystem General Usage	53	4037	May 30, 2026
Implementation Hiding Proposal Internals & Design proposal	19	1861	May 10, 2018
Forward compatibility and stability of Julia vs. Packages General Usage	97	4341	August 27, 2023
I find it hard to develop in Julia Internals & Design	71	5083	February 13, 2026
Private states in Julia modules General Usage question , package	24	7939	November 20, 2024

Base.modules_warned_for silently removed in 1.8

Related topics