On 4/18/2012 1:19 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/16/2012 1:54 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 16:52:54 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer <[email protected]>
wrote:
But we need to change the name early on to avoid conflicts. I don't think a
more generic name would be inappropriate, even if the GC is the only client at
first.
Should have said "But we need to change the name early on to avoid confusion
later", i.e. "why is this GCInfo template generating reflection info that the GC
doesn't use?"
Not a bad idea.
Done.
I think it is a worthwhile idea because it leaves the door open for all kinds of
information to be generated for types, without needing to modify the compiler at
all.
Also incorporated Jacob's suggestion to make it a property.
