On Saturday, June 16, 2018 22:11:09 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d- learn wrote:
> On Saturday, 16 June 2018 at 21:41:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 16, 2018 14:55:51 Steven Schveighoffer via
> >
> > Digitalmars-d- learn wrote:
> >> On 7/30/16 8:47 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I'm writing some serialization code where I need to skip static variables. So, I have a symbol from a struct, and I'd like to test whether it's static or not. Ideally, I'd be able to do something like
> >> >
> >> > is(field == static)
> >>
> >> std.traits.hasStaticMember ?
> >>
> >> https://dlang.org/phobos/std_traits.html#hasStaticMember
> >
> > Yeah. I wrote that, and it got added to Phobos. If you'll note, my post in this thread was from almost two years ago.
>
> Haha! I usually don’t get caught with these old threads!

It's _really_ obvious in my e-mail reader, since I have threading turned on, and it the threads are sorted by the date of the first post in the thread, so the thread is way up in the list such that I'm only likely to even notice that such a post has been made if I tell my client to filter out read e-mails so that I can find the e-mails that I haven't read yet which aren't at the bottom where all of the recent stuff is. Someone could have replied in an old thread and really want me to respond, and I could easily not notice the message for weeks if I'm not trying to get the unread count down to zero and notice that once I've caught up with all of the recent messages, the number is still greater than zero.

I kind of wish that the forum software discouraged against necro-ing threads like this, since they're easy for many of us to miss, and once someone replies to them and brings them to the front of the list in the forum software, folks tends to reply as if the thread were recent without noticing how old it is.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Saturday, 16 June 2018 at 21:41:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Saturday, June 16, 2018 14:55:51 Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d- learn wrote:
>> On 7/30/16 8:47 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
>> > I'm writing some serialization code where I need to skip static variables. So, I have a symbol from a struct, and I'd like to test whether it's static or not. Ideally, I'd be able to do something like
>> >
>> > is(field == static)
>>
>> std.traits.hasStaticMember ?
>>
>> https://dlang.org/phobos/std_traits.html#hasStaticMember
>
> Yeah. I wrote that, and it got added to Phobos. If you'll note, my post in this thread was from almost two years ago.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

doesn't work:

..\..\src\phobos\std\traits.d(3823): Error: class `app.A` member `z` is not accessible.

What is the point of introspection if one can't get information about a type due to it's protection level?

For example, how is one suppose to serialize a class that has protected and private members, which are common, when using properties?

On Saturday, June 16, 2018 22:56:38 DigitalDesigns via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Saturday, 16 June 2018 at 21:41:37 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 16, 2018 14:55:51 Steven Schveighoffer via
> >
> > Digitalmars-d- learn wrote:
> >> On 7/30/16 8:47 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I'm writing some serialization code where I need to skip static variables. So, I have a symbol from a struct, and I'd like to test whether it's static or not. Ideally, I'd be able to do something like
> >> >
> >> > is(field == static)
> >>
> >> std.traits.hasStaticMember ?
> >>
> >> https://dlang.org/phobos/std_traits.html#hasStaticMember
> >
> > Yeah. I wrote that, and it got added to Phobos. If you'll note, my post in this thread was from almost two years ago.
> >
> > - Jonathan M Davis
>
> doesn't work:
>
> ..\..\src\phobos\std\traits.d(3823): Error: class `app.A` member
> `z` is not accessible.
>
> What is the point of introspection if one can't get information about a type due to it's protection level?
>
> For example, how is one suppose to serialize a class that has protected and private members, which are common, when using properties?

The fact that you can't introspect on private variables with stuff like __traits is a well-known bug, and I expect that it will be fixed at some point. But if it's serialization that you want, then as I understand it, tupleof should work to get at the direct fields of a struct or class even if they're private. And you can always look at what a serialization library like Orange did.

- Jonathan M Davis

On 6/16/18 6:23 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I kind of wish that the forum software discouraged against necro-ing threads
> like this, since they're easy for many of us to miss, and once someone
> replies to them and brings them to the front of the list in the forum
> software, folks tends to reply as if the thread were recent without noticing
> how old it is.

There is somewhat of a colorization of the date based on the age, but it's not drastic enough for ancient threads, and it's not as obvious as it would be if, say, the whole line was colored differently.

-Steve