[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?

[shooly]

So it is NOT built-in and the code example shown above is dishonest - @SuperV1234 compares how "lean" two languages are but conveniently hides half of the code in their preferred language to make it seem simpler that it actually is, as otherwise it would look bad in the comparison!

[pjmlp]

Reflection is built in, the support is there, anyone can make a left pad out such simple snippet.

[wiseowise]

Typical C++ dev schizophrenia. In one thread complain about Node and its death-by-a-thousand-packages, then suggest the same in another.

[pjmlp]

Don't put assumptions in others heads.

First of all, the only correct way to use package managers is with validated internal repos, don't vibe install, that goes for node, and goes for C++ as well.

Second this thread was all about how code lands in one's computer.

[SuperV1234]

Package? We're suggesting to copy paste 5 lines and stick them into a header.

[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.

[shooly]

So finally, it's NOT built-in, and the parent comment was showing that in other languages - it IS built-in. So your code example is NOT correct and comparison is NOT correct, because you just hid the most important part of it, which is the implementation, that the user has to either: a) write themselves, b) find somewhere on the Internet.

[SuperV1234]

So? The original argument was about the "ugly" syntax that the user didn't want to interact with nor read. I proved that there's no need to do so to consume reflection utils.