"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'm very interested in having a reflection library available, but I can't
>> afford any time to helping with the work, sorry. However, I'd suggest you
>> take into consideration XTI, which is an idea for reflection in C++ from
>> Bjarne Stroustrup (there's several links to this on the web, one of which
>> is http://www.klid.dk/arrangementer/XTI_kbh.pdf, do a Google search for
>> the others). I think his work on it has stagnated, at least from some
>> things I've heard from others, which is unfortunate. But I think his work
>> would be a great place to start from for a Boost reflection framework.
>
> I'm definitely looking into this. After educating myself, I was planning
> on contacting BS about the current status of his project. If anyone
> happens to know more information, or is in a position to find out more,
> please do so and/or let me know. TIA.
FWIW, I don't think it would be smart to put *too* many eggs in this
basket. Because XTI is based on debug symbol information, it is
neccessarily limited in certain ways that a full-compiler-based
solution is not. For example, I'm fairly certain that some details
unneccessary for debugging like access control
(public/private/protected) are dropped.
--
David Abrahams
[EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
