<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Hi Sam,</div><div><br></div><br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#000000"><br></font>What form of reflection would you want?  I don't think I'm going to<br>give access to the internal type representation, since I want to be<br>able to change that in the future.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'd need the return type of a function, as I'm tagging objects depending on that. Right now I'm using a workaround, I'm evaluating the expression and then test the result for its type, but I wouldn't need this if I could find out the operator's return type.</div><div>I can get along with the workaround, only the other way would be more natural (if possible).</div><div>Would there be a way to offer this information by some "convenience function", not necessitating exposal of the internal representation? But really it's not that urgent, I was just asking to be sure I don't oversee it in the documentation :-;</div><div><br></div><div>Ciao,</div><div>Sigrid</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>-- <br>sam th<br><a href="mailto:samth@ccs.neu.edu">samth@ccs.neu.edu</a><br></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>