Christopher Wright wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I am becoming increasingly aware that we need to provide some means to
define certain members (data and functions) for each class as if they
were pasted there.
Most of the examples given would be well served by decent builtin
reflection. Walter thinks reflection is too expensive to be active by
default. Find a cheaper way to provide runtime reflection. It's not as
sexy as using templates, but it's DRY and easier to use. Slower, but you
don't pay the cost of reflection multiple times if you have multiple
libraries requiring reflection.
What cheaper way would be than allowing a base class to prescribe
reflection for its hierarchy? Where do templates even enter the mix?
What's slower and why? Why do reflection as a language feature
(increases base language size, buggy, rigid) instead of allowing it as a
library if we so can? I'm totally against that.
Andrei
