Proposal for __traits

[Chris Nicholson-Sauls]

Jari-Matti Mäkelä wrote:
> Leonard Dahlmann wrote:
> 
>> davidl Wrote:
>>
>>> __traits itself is great
>>> though i think adding some builtin properties for class would be nicer
>> That's basically a nice idea. The problem with that though is, that
>> the properties would need to be available at both compile time
>> and runtime.
> 
> Why do they have to be available at runtime? Is e.g. mystruct.tupleof
> available at runtime? I think a greater problem appears because of symbol
> collisions. Still, I wouldn't mind having metaproperties instead of
> __something.

I'd say there's a shot the '__' will disappear eventually.  As I understand it the 
double-underscore is supposed to mean "this is experimental".

-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls