C++26 Reflection loves QRangeModel(qt.io)
qt.io
C++26 Reflection loves QRangeModel
https://www.qt.io/blog/c26-reflection-qrangemodel
10 comments
While I agree it has a certain Perl feeling and I used to advocate for functions/operators, e.g. reflex or similar, it still feels better than unicode operators in FP languages or the two macro systems used by Rust.
At least being based on compile time execution infrastructure means you can debug it on IDEs, Clion already has some work into that direction.
https://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2025/09/introducing-constex...
At least being based on compile time execution infrastructure means you can debug it on IDEs, Clion already has some work into that direction.
https://blog.jetbrains.com/clion/2025/09/introducing-constex...
Eh, the raw capability of this feature will I think prove its use
It this even a language for human beings anymore? Or am I just short on cups of coffee this morning?
I appreciate that they're solving a lot of corner cases and adding some advanced functionality in the spec but now we've got language text that looks quite a bit like perl. I wonder if it will acquire some of the same properties.
I appreciate that they're solving a lot of corner cases and adding some advanced functionality in the spec but now we've got language text that looks quite a bit like perl. I wonder if it will acquire some of the same properties.
Most users would not need to use it. But it is invaluable for library/framework authors (like qt).
Until something else takes over the domains where C++ rules, it is what we have, even the crustacean compiler is built on top of C++ infrastructure (LLVM/GCC).
It's all so tiresome
TLDR:
> Reflection in C++26 might be insufficient for replacing moc.
https://wiki.qt.io/C++_reflection_(P2996)_and_moc
> Reflection in C++26 might be insufficient for replacing moc.
https://wiki.qt.io/C++_reflection_(P2996)_and_moc
> NOTE: THIS HAS BEEN WRITTEN AGAINST A VERY EARLY REVISION OF P2996. MANY THINGS HAVE CHANGED SINCE, AND EVERYTHING ON THIS PAGE NEED TO BE RE-EVALUATED BASED ON WHAT EFFECTIVELY LANDED IN C++26!
Taken from bookmarks, haven't noticed this before. Looking forward for the article update.
^^T ?? obj.[:member:] ?? What is this craziness? No way this is the best we could come up with. I'm actually thinking C++ may be going too far (and this is as someone who thinks template metaprogramming is "fine").
Never before has that quote "inside C++ is a smaller, better language trying to get out" been more applicable.