Discussion on static reflection syntax in C++
sealabjaster at gmail.com
Mon Feb 22 18:01:34 UTC 2021
On Monday, 22 February 2021 at 16:27:49 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
> Of possible interest:
"Readability. Obviously, we’d like our programs to be readable.
We want syntax that is both visually distinctive yet
Can anyone more experienced with C++ confirm that this is in any
way readable and easy to understand? Because my definition of
"readability" appears to be vastly different, especially when I
imagine it being used alongside the rest of C++'s symbol spam.
"(: R :). Looks like smiley faces"
But apparently "[:" and ":]" don't. Part of me feels like the
designer(s) really wanted to use square brackets for that extra
I don't really have anything constructive to say about this
(presumably) draft proposal, because the actual feature itself is
of course pretty useful, and I'm not really qualified to say
whether this proposal is a good fit or not. But why is it that
C++ uses such unusual syntax for everything?
More information about the Digitalmars-d