Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!qantel!lll-lcc!lll-crg!hoptoad!gnu
From: gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: enum function bug?
Message-ID: <1148@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: Mon, 29-Sep-86 01:08:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: hoptoad.1148
Posted: Mon Sep 29 01:08:03 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 30-Sep-86 20:02:54 EDT
References: <299@sdchema.sdchem.UUCP> <86900054@haddock> <572@opus.nbires.UUCP> <7079@boring.mcvax.UUCP>
Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco
Lines: 25

I think the definitive word on this has been said already:

Date:  8 Nov 1982 0216-PST (Monday)
From: decwrl!decvax!harpo!npoiv!alice!research!dmr
Subject: enums
Newsgroups: net.lang.c

There has been a lot of grousing about the uselessness of the enum type
in C, most of it justified under the circumstances.  The circumstances
are that all versions of PCC that I know of are buggy in their treatment
of this type.

Enums were intended to be entirely equivalent to ints; just a way, really,
of defining names for constants understood by the compiler and subject
to the normal scope rules.

There was a clear choice here: enums as utterly separate collections of atoms,
more or less as in Pascal, or as ways of naming integers.  I chose the
latter after some waffling.  Unfortunately, some of the waffle batter
got mixed in with PCC and has stayed there.

		Dennis Ritchie
-- 
John Gilmore  {sun,ptsfa,lll-crg,ihnp4}!hoptoad!gnu   jgilmore@lll-crg.arpa
		     May the Source be with you!