From 4839925039382349784 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,ccb40040597f37a7 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-12 12:50:28 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!skynet.be!skynet.be!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!devnull From: brangdon@cix.co.uk (Dave Harris) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Extending enums (was Re: Forward declaration of enum) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:50:27 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 45 Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: <3E6C739E.9850D2A5@bdal.de> X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1047502227 10535 10.0.0.1 (12 Mar 2003 20:50:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:50:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.oz.au ([128.250.1.22]) by news.demon.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18tDBC-0002jm-00 for mail2news@news.news.demon.net; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:50:26 +0000 X-Received: by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU id HAA15008; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 07:50:23 +1100 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-Reply-To: brangdon@cix.co.uk X-Orig-NNTP-Posting-Host: pc1-clif1-6-cust113.nott.cable.ntl.com (80.4.200.113) X-Orig-X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1047331461 66945518 80.4.200.113 (16 [57443]) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 version=2.41 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:18285 dsp@bdal.de (Daniel Spangenberg) wrote (abridged): > For the same reason, I nearly always encapsulate enumeration > definitions into classes, like > > struct Color { enum Type { Red, Orange, Yellow }; }; > > because I like the stronger enforcement of the complete name resolution > of class namespaces. I prefer the openness. This is partly because my local compiler supports forward enum declarations, so I can write: namespace Colour { enum Type; } If I tried that with a struct I'd come a cropper on the One Definition Rule. (I use this language extension a lot - which is part of why I advocate making it standard.) > Why do you think, that Color::Type" is not a convenient identifier? It's an invented name, a placeholder purely to satisfy the compiler. I'd much rather be able to write: Colour c = Colour::Red; Compare with: struct Colour { const Colour Red, Green, Blue; }; Colour c = Colour::red; Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK | "Weave a circle round him thrice, brangdon@cix.co.uk | And close your eyes with holy dread, | For he on honey dew hath fed http://www.bhresearch.co.uk/ | And drunk the milk of Paradise." --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]