reflective enums

[janderson]

janderson wrote:
> renoX wrote:
>> Kevin Bealer a écrit :
>>> == Quote from renoX (renosky at free.fr)'s article
>>>> - why the name getString instead of the usual toString name?
>>>
>>> That could be changed too; I think of toString() as an object method, 
>>> and
>>> when adding a static method, I figured I should use a different name to
>>> avoid conflicting with the method.  I didn't really check whether there
>>> is a real conflict on this.
>>
>>  From my testing, it doesn't trigger a conflict, but I've only tested 
>> it inside one file.
>>
>>> There is kind of a strangeness with the way I defined this in that you
>>> creating instances of the Enum!(...) struct is not useful.  The type is
>>> only really interesting for its static properties.
>>
>> About this I was wondering if it wouldn't be less strange to do a 
>> template like this:
>>
>> // expected usage: DefEnum!("enum ListEnumFoo {A,B=1};")
> 
> Advantage: you would be able to reuse the code as a sub-set of something 
> else like serialization or another language that uses the same enum syntax.
> 
> Disadvantage: Code is harder to understand.  Code runs slower.

Correction: The interpreter code is harder to understand.

> 
> -Joel
> 
> -Joel