Don wrote:
I'm starting to think we need a
separate namespace for the CT stuff.
D.compiles(XXX)
D.typeof(foo)
D.stringof(T)
D.allMembers(T)
That's not bad. Can't be 'D', though, has to look like a keyword. Maybe
something like 'traits' instead. In exchange, get rid of the '__traits'
and 'typeid' keywords. Not sure about typeof, though.
traits.compiles(XXX)
traits.typeid(TTT)
traits.stringof(T)
traits.allMembers(T)
traits.error("message");
IMHO this looks better than __traits(compiles, XXX) but it actually has
the same flexibility, and it's a straightforward transformation inside
the compiler.
For bonus points, allow 'with(traits)':
with(traits) {
if (compiles(XXX)) return stringof(T);
else error("Can't use " ~ stringof(T) ~ " in a transmogrifier.");
}
This could even be implemented in phobos (or object.d to avoid an import
when you want to use it), using something like:
pragma(traits) struct traits
{
// Members automatically added by the compiler, or maybe just their
// declarations eg:
static T delegate()[] allMembers(T)(T type);
}
This way there's no need to force a certain name, as it can be chosen by
the developer (by either using renaming imports or just giving the
struct a different name eg pragma(traits) struct meta {}).
