Please don't generate structs with private fields

[Blei]

It doesn't make sense that a low-level C binding library would have structs with private fields. At least in cases where there is no accessible constructor; an example that I'm running into is GSourceFuncs.

[gkoz]

So far we've been making private fields which are explicitly marked as private upstream (GSourceFuncs). This does cause problems in various places so I'm considering relaxing this rule. I'm reluctant to simply publish all fields though.

[antoyo]

An example that I think needs to have a public field is Volatile.
Currently, it seems impossible to create a Volatile to set the ref_count to -1.
Could you please change to definition to:

pub struct Volatile<T>(pub T);

Thanks.

[antoyo]

@gkoz @EPashkin @GuillaumeGomez I use Volatile multiple times in my gdbus crate as you can see here.
Could you please change the definition?
Or is there another way to achieve what I want.
Thanks.

[gkoz]

@antoyo Volatile had been impossible to implement for a while but now that there's a volatile crate we can probably use it.