inline fun <reified T : Any> myFunc() = myFuncImpl(T::class)

internal fun <T : Any> myFuncImpl(clazz: KClass<T>) {}

#language-proposals How about making this compile?

Then the inline function needs to be internal as well

I know why it doesn't work.

Hmmm. So why is this a problem?

But

internal

is actually

public

on bytecode level, so it's "possible" to call it anyway from outside the library.

I suppose, but is it really that important to keep it internal? I use this sort of pattern often, and I don't see any problem in having it public. Plus it makes sense from a Java interop perspective. How else would you call it from Java?

That's why it's a #general question, not a direct #language-proposals proposal.

I see

I was doing code review on a friends library.

I don’t like them either xP

Maybe they could be generated by the compiler somehow. In such a way that they are inaccessible from Kotlin code, but accessible from Java code. That would keep the Java interop intact, while not polluting the API from a Kotlin point of view

This is argument: Kotlin is not only Java, but also JS and possibly native in future 😕

I am not sure if the same interop problem applies in JS. Maybe someone with more KotlinJS experience can confirm?

I don’t want to sound like I am against it. I support making internal accessible in public inline functions. I think that discussion should be about how it should work, not what can we do in what platform. But thinking ahead if it won’t cause the problems might be helpful.

If you want to call internal api from public inline function, you need to annotate it with

@PublishedApi

annotation. This will make it effectively public.

oooh

Hmm seems to be not working as well 😛

It's working fine for me

It says is only for internal declaration

You learn every day 🙂

@pavlospt you put the annotation on the internal function

so on the override inline fun <reified T>

Are we talking about the same thing?

I have a method called

getFoo

that is overriden

Let's move this discussion to another thread. I think you're talking about the issue you posted about previously.

@pavlospt, I was answering to @mg6maciej's question that was in the beginning of this thread

@ilya.gorbunov Thanks for the annotation. What's the impact of using it? Will the

internal

function be visible to users of the library? a) In Java or b) in Kotlin?

a) yes I have tested it

Ok. Cool.

in Java?

Makes sense. Thanks.

The name of the member with such annotation must not be mangled. There was some bug though in 1.1.0 with property accessors being mangled, but is has been already fixed in 1.1.1