Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!prls!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
From: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Enum vs Define
Message-ID: <2208@mmintl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 23-Jun-87 21:22:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: mmintl.2208
Posted: Tue Jun 23 21:22:47 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jun-87 04:43:26 EDT
References: <196@dbase.UUCP>
Reply-To: franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams)
Organization: Multimate International, E. Hartford, CT.
Lines: 23
Keywords: enum, define

In article <196@dbase.UUCP> awd@dbase.UUCP (Alastair Dallas) writes:
>Why use enum instead of #define?  For example, if I've
>got an array of error message strings indexed with ERRMSGA, ERRMSGB
>identifiers, isn't it more robust to explicitly define the values
>(which must correspond to the array) than to let the compiler do it?
[i.e.]
>	enum {
>		ERRMSGA = 1,
>		ERRMSGB = 2
>		};

This is a good example of a case where I would *not* put explicit constants
in the enum.  Suppose, having built a list of 100 error messages, the third
one becomes irrelevant and is to be removed?  This way, you have to either
manually renumber 96 error messages, leave a hole in the table, or move
another message down.

Trying to make message files consistent from release to release is a fool's
errand.
-- 

Frank Adams                           ihnp4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka
Ashton-Tate          52 Oakland Ave North         E. Hartford, CT 06108