search for: annotationtyp

...or tools to introspect anntoations. Java's annotations rely on simple types for the same principle and I think it is the right way for most things. There could be an opaque type for more complex information, which should be discouraged. This would also make it possible to have tripple of Value,AnnotationType,Name to match the Annotation, which helps to the solve the collision problem too. The lookup mechanism could lookup by anything of the tripple: - Target Value - AnnotationType - Name NULL values are wildcards. So you could say: Give me all annotations for a Value* /// Function local annotatio...

...tions. Java's annotations rely > on simple types for the same principle and I think it is the right way > for most things. There could be an opaque type for more complex > information, which should be discouraged. > > This would also make it possible to have tripple of > Value,AnnotationType,Name to match the Annotation, which helps to the > solve the collision problem too. > > The lookup mechanism could lookup by anything of the tripple: > - Target Value > - AnnotationType > - Name > > NULL values are wildcards. > > So you could say: > > Give me al...

Hi Jakob, I have some thoughts on this too .. On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 19:56 +0100, Jakob Praher wrote: > I get you 100 % here. But as you say later in the mail, many information > is done by some runtime std::map<Value*,foo> stuff. Which is really > handy at runtime, but I *had* serialization in mind when I was thinking > about Annotations. I see annotations as a way to serialize

Hi, thanks for reading. Since hours, I am facing a problem and it seems that I am not able to solve it. Let''s say, I''ve got a model called "AnnotationType". This model has got a method called "foobar(x)". It''s just so simple. I can access this method in my unit tests, in the console (all modes), but if I start the server in production mode and try to access this method from within a view, it can just be found on the first req...

...nnotations rely >>on simple types for the same principle and I think it is the right way >>for most things. There could be an opaque type for more complex >>information, which should be discouraged. >> >>This would also make it possible to have tripple of >>Value,AnnotationType,Name to match the Annotation, which helps to the >>solve the collision problem too. >> >>The lookup mechanism could lookup by anything of the tripple: >>- Target Value >>- AnnotationType >>- Name >> >>NULL values are wildcards. >> >>So yo...

hi Chris! thanks for your reply. First of all I did not know about the history with the Annotation stuff. Annotable for me was a way how one could realize this things. So as I see it right now - it is more that Annotable will completly vanish soon. This is interesting to me. Chris Lattner schrieb: > On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Jakob Praher wrote: > >> When translating a complex c