A screenshot from the linked article titled "Reflection in C++26", showing reflection as one of the bullet points listed in the "Core Language" section
Java has reflection since version 1.1.
It's actually quite useful in situations and most popular frameworks use it.
It depends on you if it turns into a footgun.
See my other comment for more detials but it kind of destroys the type safety of the language. In Java for example, it lets you modify private/protected fields and call private/protected methods.
It's also slower than accessing a field normally since you need to do a string lookup (but slightly faster than a hashmap/dictionary) so if you use it over a large enough list it'll cause slowdowns.
Most use cases for it in Java/C# revolve around testing, serialization, and dynamic filtering/sorting. And most of those cases can be handled more safely using macros/attributes (EDIT: and templates as well, though those are also pretty painful to deal with) because that gets handled at compile-time in C/C++.
You have to see it as "root"-mode, it gives you the means to do stuff you need to do but cannot do otherwise. Most times it's for workarounds for problems you can't solve. If you use reflection you are fully responsible.
Of course you normally shouldn't use it, in 10 years I used it maybe one or two times. It's more of a last resort.
It's the capability of a program to "reflect" upon itself, I.E. to inspect and understand its own code.
As an example, In C# you can write a class...
public class MyClass
{
public void MyMethod()
{
...
}
}
...and you can create an instance of it, and use it, like this...
var myClass = new MyClass();
myClass.MyMethod();
Simple enough, nothing we haven't all seen before.
But you can do the same thing with reflection, as such...
var type = System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly()
.GetType("MyClass");
var constructor = type.GetConstructor(Array.Empty<Type>());
var instance = constructor.Invoke(Array.Empty<Object>());
var method = type.GetMethod("MyMethod");
var delegate = method.CreateDelegate(typeof(Action), instance);
delegate.DynamicInvoke(Array.Empty<object>());
Obnoxious and verbose and tossing basically all type safety out the window, but it does enable some pretty crazy interesting things. Like self-discovery and dynamic loading of plugins, or self-configuration of apps. Also often useful when messing with generics. I could dig up some practical use-cases, if you're curious.
Not a C++ dev, but looking at Java, which has reflection: Reflection allows to inspect and modify runtime attributes of classes, interfaces, fields and methods. Even, when you don't know their names at compile time.
Basically take any object and just ask "what are your (even private) fields?" and then happily modify them, or call these methods, or...
If wasn't full garbage collection in the spec. It was some infrastructure support in the spec that would make it easier to write garbage collectors in C++.
This, however, is about diagnostics, i. e. annotating delete with a reason (message) to express developer intent when deleting a function, not about memory management.
I can see the footguns, but I can also see the huge QoL improvement - no more std::enable_if spam to check if a class type has a member, if you can just check for them.
... at least I hope it would be less ugly than std::enable_if.
There's a pretty big difference though. To my understanding enable_if happens at compile time, while reflection typically happens at runtime. Using the latter would cause a pretty big performance impact over a (large) list of data.
I imagine reflections would make the process more straightforward, requires expressions are powerful but either somewhat verbose or possibly incomplete.
For instance, in your example foo could have any of the following declarations in a class: