[SuperV1234]

C++:

  enum Color { red, green, blue };
  auto name = to_enum_string(Color::Red); // "Red"

[shooly]

... and where does that `to_enum_string` come from exactly? It doesn't seem to be built-in, which is the point of the parent comment.

[SuperV1234]

It's a fair comparison. The parent comment isn't showing the compiler source code for the built-in reflection mechanisms.

You won't have to care about ^^ and [:X:] if you just want to consume reflection-based utils, which was the whole point of my comment.

[shooly]

What? No. Parent comment is comparing C++ to modern programming languages, showcasing how they provide commonly used utilities out-of-the-box instead of making every programmer re-implement them again and again and again and again and again.

[SuperV1234]

The parent comment is quite clear:

> Why do I have to be familiar with all those weird symbols just to do a trivial thing ?

And my answer demonstrates that you do not have to.

[shooly]

> And my answer demonstrates that you do not have to

Then again - "where does that `to_enum_string` come from exactly?".

[pjmlp]

A library that you install via vcpkg or conan.

How many libraries do you read the source code after installing them with the package manager?

[SuperV1234]

  #include "to_enum_string.h"

You don't have to understand it to use it. Even then, it's not that hard to understand, it just looks unfamiliar.

[gpderetta]

The whole point of reflection is that it doesn't have to be builtin.