To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"Introspection/reflection is very useful when writing scriptable applications and applications that employ the use of macros."
Sure. Which probably puts you in the third category I mentioned "people trying to load and run new / unknown objects dynamically at runtime".
"Namespaces are a nicety for the programmer."
No argument here. But anything above assembly language is just "a nicety for the programmer". After all, ultimately all programs ever created can be written in assembly language. The vast majority of what we consider to be good programming practice is more to do with making things nice for programmers. It doesn't change the end user perspective very much. I can do the same thing using spaghetti code as I can with structured programming, and the end user won't know the difference.






Member since:
I value reflection and introspection as well. But they are not nearly as "central" as the idea of not poluting the global namespace. Reflection is not commonly used except by people writing development tools, frameworks, or trying to load and run new / unknown objects dynamically at runtime.
Introspection/reflection is very useful when writing scriptable applications and applications that employ the use of macros. In my field of EDA, this is very common. These kind of features yield benefit to the end user. Namespaces are a nicety for the programmer. As far as being "central" is concerned, we are just arguing woolly semantics now.