Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!utoday!comeau
From: comeau@utoday.UUCP (Greg Comeau)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: For Lawyers, const (not really enums)
Keywords: const, enum, zortech, c++
Message-ID: <1147@utoday.UUCP>
Date: 11 Jan 90 17:28:54 GMT
References: <969@rna.UUCP>
Reply-To: comeau@.UUCP (Greg Comeau)
Organization: UNIX Today!, Manhasset, NY
Lines: 23

In article <969@rna.UUCP> kc@rna.UUCP (Kaare Christian) writes:
>My real problem has to do with const, and how it seems to work
>differently when applied to enum vs when applied to something
>fundamental, like int.
>I've become convinced that const enums in ztc are not quite right.
>Comments, anyone?

Yes, your last statement is correct.  This is not a C++ 2.0 spec
problem but an implementation problem.

>Because of this, I am almost unable to use const
>enum types, and that seems a shame, because it makes me either return
>to #define, or actually store things in variables that needn't take up
>a storage location.

I think you're best off avoiding the alternatives (including your mention
of bitfields in your previous message) above and just adding in the
extra [agreed, verbose] casts so that you can get on with your work.
-- 
Greg, Comeau Computing, 91-34 120th Street, Richmond Hill, NY, 11418
Producers of CC C++, SysAdm columnist for UNIX Today!, Microsoft Systems Journal
(C programming), + others. Also, BIX c.language & c.plus.plus conf. moderator.
Here:attmail!csanta!greg / BIX:comeau / CIS:72331, 3421 / voice:718-849-2355