Super-dee-duper D features

[janderson]

Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) wrote:
> janderson wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) wrote:
>>> janderson wrote:
>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) wrote:
>>>>> janderson wrote:
>>>>>> Note: I'm not arguing that meta-programming should be higher 
>>>>>> priority then say reflection.  I'm just arguing that its just an 
>>>>>> extension to what programmers do on a day-to-day basis.
>>>>>
>>>>> But metaprogramming *gives* reflection (as even you and others 
>>>>> discussed recently). The half-assed way to do reflection is to have 
>>>>> the language implementer sit down and define the run-time 
>>>>> reflection mechanism. The full-assed way is to define compile-time 
>>>>> reflection, to then allow people to define and refine run-time 
>>>>> reflection mechanisms as libraries, in addition to many other 
>>>>> useful libraries! It's like in the fish vs. fishing parable.
>>>>
>>>> I agree but its like the stl vectors.  I'm unsure weather it just is 
>>>> easier to have that kinda thing in the language because it already 
>>>> has much of that information. 
>>>
>>> The information being there is all the more reason to make it 
>>> available during compilation, for reflection and many other purposes, 
>>> e.g. PyD being one of them.
>>>
>>>> Also to write a reflection program that doesn't require wrapping 
>>>> each and every call you'd need to write a fully fledged compiler 
>>>> which may become out of sync with the compiler.   I'm undecided on 
>>>> this matter.
>>>
>>> Not sure I understand. All that will be needed to make Widget 
>>> available is:
>>>
>>> mixin Manifest!(Widget);
>>>
>>> I don't see where the syncing problem occurs.
>>
>> This is wrapping each class.  What if the the code was hidden in a 
>> library or something.  How would you get a such information?  Also 
>> wrapping each class is not as neat as a complete code analysis could 
>> be (which is possible in mixin, just very difficult and slow).
>>
>> Syncing problems could still occur if Walter decides to make some 
>> change in the language syntax.
> 
> I find it reasonable to require one line per exposed class. This is even 
> easier than writing a manifest file.
> 
> 
> Andrei

Very true however I think it could be written in a way that is easier. 
I'm on the fence with this on.

-Joel