Fully dynamic d by opDotExp overloading

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> Sure, but what is the reason to need dynamic methods?  I'm just trying 
> to understand the usefulness of it.  If a method is dynamic, we lose the 
> following things:
> 
> - compile-time type/signature checking
> - IDE assistance in determining which methods are available
> - ease of tracing where a method call goes.
> - not future proof -- for example, if a method name gets changed or 
> moved, the code using the method still compiles.
> 
> If we lose all these things, there must be *something* we gain by doing 
> this, right?

There are people who swear by the ability of adding methods at runtime 
and changing the inheritance hierarchy dynamically. It makes for a very 
fluid environment.

> Also, what is the benefit of doing something like this versus 
> specifically calling the dispatcher instead of having the compiler 
> translate it?

Probably that's more of a "last mile" thing.


Andrei