Chances of D getting proper runtime reflection?

[Robert Jacques]

On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 06:55:52 -0400, Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com> wrote:

> What are the chances of D getting proper runtime reflection? Something
> like this:
>
> class Foo
> {
>      private int a;
>
>      private void bar (int i)
>      {
>          a = i;
>      }
> }
>
> auto foo = new Foo;
> Object o = foo;
> o.setInstanceVariable("a", 3);
> assert(foo.a == 3);
>
> This would be useful as well:
>
> o.send("bar", 5);
> assert(foo.a == 5);
> assert(foo.a == o.getInstanceVariable("a"));
>
> Currently I have most use of the first example. These example should
> work regardless if the fields/methods are private, protected or public.
>
> As far as I know this wouldn't require any changes to the language, only
> the compiler and runtime would need to be modified. To me, it doesn't
> look that complicated to implement, the runtime just needs to store an
> associative arrays that maps names of instance variables and methods to
> their addresses. This could probably be stored in the ClassInfo.
> Something like this:
>
> Foo.classinfo.setInstanceVariable(foo, "a", 3);
>
> And this could be shorted to:
>
> o.setInstanceVariable("a", 3);
>
> "setInstanceVariable" could just forward the call to the class info.
>

I've basically done this entirely in library code: see https://jshare.johnshopkins.edu/rjacque2/public_html/variant.mht