User loginNavigation |
archivesTypes and reflectionIn my day-job as a Java programmer I use a lot of tools that relies heavily on reflection, and I've come up with quite a few uses of reflection that can simplify my day job. Having also become quite fond of OCaml and it's powerful type systems I've started wondering if combining reflection with a powerful type system is possible. The two features seem quite at odds with each other, reflection completely undermines the type system, something I also see every day in my day-job. Has anyone looked at ways of combining the power of these two language features? In OCaml I'll have to resort to something like camlp4 if I want to do the stuff I use reflection for in Java. But it's seems to me that there might be a middle ground between syntactic extension and the metaprogramming allowed by reflection. Or is there some fundamental reason why this is impossible? As you probably understand I really don't have any clue what this is called, or if it exists, or if it's useful, so I'm curious about anything that might shed some light on it. |
Browse archivesActive forum topics |
Recent comments
23 weeks 2 hours ago
23 weeks 6 hours ago
23 weeks 6 hours ago
45 weeks 1 day ago
49 weeks 3 days ago
51 weeks 14 hours ago
51 weeks 14 hours ago
1 year 1 week ago
1 year 6 weeks ago
1 year 6 weeks ago