Defining some stuff for each class in turn
Andrei Alexandrescu
SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org
Thu Oct 1 18:05:41 PDT 2009
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
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list