Why hiding field of ExtendedGcd?

[survived]

Noticed that there's no way to construct ExtendedGcd from user code (because of hidden field), and I can't implement Integer::extended_gcd (as I can't construct being returned structure) and I have to use your generic implementation of egcd. Perhaps there should be ExtendedGcd::new() constructor?

[cuviper]

It's just meant as an approximation of the newer #[non_exhaustive] attribute, allowing the possibility of new fields in the future. I'm not sure what else we would want to add though, so maybe we should just remove the hidden field and let it be done.

[survived]

Yep, removing this field makes sense

[tspiteri]

I hit this when trying to implement num_integer::Integer for rug::Integer, and had to use a very ugly hack complete with transmute to create an ExtendedGcd struct.