Chances of D getting proper runtime reflection?

[Vladimir Panteleev]

On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 16:31:14 +0300, Alex Rønne Petersen  
<xtzgzorex at gmail.com> wrote:

> I really don't think this is a valid cause of concern in this day and  
> age.

Perhaps not for you.

> Look at Java and .NET. They're doing just fine even with all metadata  
> being available.

And that's why obfuscators exist.

> Plenty of commercial C++ products ship with RTTI these days, too (AAA  
> games, even).

Some people care about this, some don't. Don't forget that many of these  
AAA games you speak of come bundled with invasive security software, with  
rootkit/spyware traits. Wouldn't you say that "security through obscurity"  
is the lesser of two evils?

> What I mean to say is, I don't think we should let this "concern" hamper  
> runtime reflection in D, because it evidently is not as big of an issue  
> as people have made it out to be in the past. Security through obscurity  
> is bad, as the saying goes.

Do you speak for everyone, then?

I certainly don't want to give any extra help to crackers, cheaters and  
griefers. It's stupid to ignore such things, and doing so does a  
disservice to your users.

-- 
Best regards,
  Vladimir                            mailto:vladimir at thecybershadow.net