Am Sun, 25 Jun 2017 10:53:35 +0000 schrieb Mike <n...@none.com>: > > I'm not really interested in that because its too blunt of an > instrument. I'd like to use TypeInfo, but only if I'm doing > dynamic casts or other things that require such runtime > information. Also, I'd only want the TypeInfo for the types that > need it in my binary. I've said this before but I'll repeat: I > like TypeInfo; I just don't like dead code. >
I think dynamic casts might actually be the only valid feature for TypeInfo. Everything else will hopefully switch to templated interfaces + CTFE introspection. -- Johannes
