search for: anntoations

...nnotations are simple or can be composite simple types and people should be encouraged to store data in a way, that makes it possible to read it without library code. If you just serialize C++ structs, you end up relying heavy on the code that wrote it. Which makes it harder for 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 A...

...e or can be composite simple types > and people should be encouraged to store data in a way, that makes it > possible to read it without library code. If you just serialize C++ > structs, you end up relying heavy on the code that wrote it. Which makes > it harder for 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,Annot...

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

...composite simple types >>and people should be encouraged to store data in a way, that makes it >>possible to read it without library code. If you just serialize C++ >>structs, you end up relying heavy on the code that wrote it. Which makes >>it harder for 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...

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