Your objection to "reflexpr" sounds good to me. ("reflectof" sounds about
right, by analogy to "alignof" — neither one is grammatical, but they're
ungrammatical in analogous ways.)
I'm not qualified to comment on the second part. It sounds like the
situation is a mess before your change, but also still quite a bit of a
mess after your change.
I do think you should clarify whether you are proposing that e.g. `reify_v`
be a synonym for `reify_value`, or if you're just proposing multiple
mutually-exclusive alternatives for discussion. If you are proposing
mutually-exclusive alternatives, you should express a clear preference for
one over the others, with rationale.

–Arthur


On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 6:43 AM Gašper Ažman via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> s/donate/denote/g
>
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 11:17 AM Михаил Найденов via Std-Proposals <
> std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>> I have written a formal proposal for alternative naming of the Reflection
>> API, based on a previous reddit discussion
>>
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/comments/dzfgbl/on_current_reflection_api_naming/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
>> --
>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>>
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
>