On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe at some point then we should just stop using gengtype and just > hand-write the walkers once. > > One of the reasons gengtype exists is because you can't easily have an > abstract interface with member functions that you can force people to > implement in C. > > In C++, we can. > > This is of course, a large change, but i'm not sure how much more work > it really is than trying to understand gengtype and rewrite it to > properly parse C++/support STL containers.
Hmmm, does C++0x add some type-reflection? ;) Richard.
