Subject: Re: [boost] Library addition request
From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-06-13 12:46:54
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Damien Buhl <damien.buhl_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 13/06/2016 13:31, Beman Dawes wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 5:45 AM, Damien Buhl <damien.buhl_at_[hidden]>
> >> Hello,
> >> I just looked briefly to the README of your library, and what I see is
> >> that most of the advantages of the library comes from the reflection
> >> facilities you've built.
> >> But I can be wrong, as I didn't looked more than that..
> >> I think that yet-another Boost.Serialization doesn't make that much
> >> sense, however I think that a Reflection library, which generates easily
> >> traits about structs/classes to iterate upon, get information about name
> >> and so on would make sense.
> >> Currently in Boost.Fusion we need a bit of that to adapt structures and
> >> classes to tuples, and therefore we generate in the same way as your
> >> library some meta information like struct_member_name. But Boost.Fusion
> >> is not intended to be a reflection library, so it won't go further than
> >> that.
> >> What would be awesome in my opinion, from a library like yours, would be
> >> to reflect type information and get the reflected information be
> >> compatible with current libraries which leverage/could leverage such
> >> information like: Boost.Spirit, Boost.Serialization, Boost.Fusion,
> >> Boost.Hana...
> >> It's just my 2cent and my opinion, I think there was already effort for
> >> a reflection library, but I think the effort stopped.
> >> +1
> > If you haven't done so already, you also might want to look at
> > http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2016/p0194r1.html
> > IIUC, that proposal is progressing through the standards committee, and
> > move to the working paper (i.e. next) stage as soon as next week at the
> > Oulu meeting.
> Thanks that you are telling about it, indeed I should have told that
> such a library would be better if it produced traits that respects the
> API of the reflection proposal.
> Do you know if there is already an implementation of the proposal, in
> terms of compiler extension, or even as a macro-based reflection type
> traits generator ?
I had to ask; turns out that link got dropped from the R1 version of the
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk