Why isn't Engine dispose implemented?

[scarletquasar]

As I see, it is no-op for now. Are you people accepting PR's? I really do not want to make a fork

[Genteure]

I'm not a maintainer but yes this project accept PRs.

quote from here:

Well first of all, the Dispose is a lie, in a sense 😉 Engine currently doesn't currently do anything in Dispose, but it's a point for things to happen and it's a good idea to account for it. It's part of getting the API "right", hopefully. We are iterating here.

It doesn't do anything because currently it doesn't need to do anything, but Engine still implement IDisposable because it might be needed later.

Discussion about making Engine implement IDisposable: #423

While on the topic of API, as @lahma expressed in various issues and PRs, we'd like to make the public API small and clean so when Jint 3.0.0 stable eventually come, the implementation can still be changed without breaking public API.
That means:

1. try to hide as much as possible (making them internal instead of public), if people are using it then we make them public again and add a test in Jint.Tests.PublicInterface.
2. make the public API able to accommodate upcoming implementation changes, for example, when something added in Engine that do need disposing.

I'm sure everything is up for discussion, if you want to remove IDispose, what's your reasoning? or if you want to implement Dispose, what do you want to call?

[lahma]

This is a great answer and I think it covers the current situation, nothing identified yet to dispose.

[scarletquasar]

I would need it in order to make an "ephemeral" engine, currenly working with multithreading in my runtime and making workarounds to keep the performance in focus.

I wanted to clear all the "ephemeral" engine content and active operations (like promises). Going to study more about that and possibly make a pull request soon.