Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Bo Persson" <bop@gmb.dk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: New strongly type enum proposal featuring inherited enums
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:30:44 +0200
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <9b4evdF34cU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <4e49ea26$2@news.x-privat.org> <j2gbf7$78s$1@dont-email.me> <2d0413bb-7638-419b-938c-b0ca3f7145c3@t29g2000vby.googlegroups.com>
X-Trace: individual.net psXKgl8GSS2vneXxuAuPzg3jv1ryqfnNBKzz4V2mz1GP1k1ibo
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AdlEWQUTOIwCm2lKymdDAIj50XQ=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 110817-1, 2011-08-17), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.c++:9039

Fred wrote:
> On Aug 17, 5:16 am, Victor Bazarov <v.baza...@comcast.invalid>
> wrote:
>> On 8/16/2011 11:28 PM, Phil Bouchard wrote:
>>
>>> Is it too late to change the strongly type enum?[..]
>>
>> We have a new Standard (ISO/IEC 14882:2011) as of August 12th, so
>> it's late for that one, but there is always the next Standard.
>>
>> V
>> --
>> I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask
>
> Why wasn't it designed using a style similar to templates:
>
> enum class <unsigned long> Val { E1, E2, E3, E4 };

It was designed to follow existing implementations. It is already 
available in MS C++/CLI, and they proposed to use the same syntax for 
ordinary C++.


Bo Persson