define_method && define_constructor does not inherit access specifier.

[chaizhenhua]

Hello,
I am wraping a C++ libray with rice. I found that the when use define_constructor or define_method, the method access specifier is changed to public.

The C++ code shoud consistent with the ruby code. but the access specifier are changed from private to public.

     // in C++
     ....
     Init_TestC {
     define_class<TestC>("TestC")
    .define_constructor(Constructor<TestC>());
    }

     # in ruby TestC is class defined in C++ above, 
     # the initialize function is public. which should be private
     require 'TestC'
     TestC.new.public_methods.include?(:initialize)
     => true 

# in ruby define a class, the initialize method is private
class TestRb
  def initialize
  end
end

# TestRb is defined in ruby, the initialize function is private
TestRb.new.public_methods.include?(:initialize)
 => false

[jasonroelofs]

I'm not sure I follow what you're asking here. If a constructor or method in C++ is anything but public, trying to wrap those methods in Rice shouldn't compile. If you want a method wrapped in C++ to appear in Ruby as private, you may need to fall back to MRI's API to make that change, as I don't believe that is available through the Rice API.

Does that answer your question?

[chaizhenhua]

Hi, thanks for your reply. I mean if in ruby define an initialize method. the method is private. but if we use define_constructor in Rice the method is public. and if we use rb_define_method("initialize ") the method is also private. so I am wondering why rice violate the convention? I do not want to define a private method through the Rice API. I just want to keep the access specifier from base class (Object). I do not want to make initialize public. can this be done by using rice?

TestRb.new.public_methods.include?(:initialize)
 => false # TestRb is defined in ruby. 
TestC.new.public_methods.include?(:initialize)
 => true # TestC is wrapped by rice, this should return false. the previous code was wrong, sorry.

[jasonroelofs]

Ah, that makes sense then, I'll take a look, thanks!