Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.c > #162918

Re: redeclaration of enumerators?

From Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: redeclaration of enumerators?
Date 2021-10-01 13:58 -0700
Organization None to speak of
Message-ID <8735pkihrn.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink)
References (8 earlier) <sj2adj$emu$1@dont-email.me> <87tui2j1m3.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <sj44gi$odk$1@dont-email.me> <bf3ac5ed-f44b-4f8d-9ffe-ad9583ade948n@googlegroups.com> <sj6csf$dvm$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
> On 30/09/2021 16:36, Malcolm McLean wrote:
>> On Thursday, 30 September 2021 at 11:45:50 UTC+1, David Brown wrote:
>>>
>>> But I think that in most cases, it is not at all helpful to think about 
>>> the underlying integer values. You get cleaner, safer, more portable 
>>> code if you treat the enumeration constants as being abstract symbols 
>>> that are members of the particular type without any other semantics or 
>>> meaning.
>>>
>> I agree, but there are some snags. One is if you wish to print out
>> the enum for debug purposes. It's easy enough to write printf("light
>> %d\n", (int) lightenumval); If you have to set up an enum to string
>> function then it's a bit clearer, but it's a huge hassle for debug.
>> The other snag is that often you want to use the enum to index into a table
>> of some sort. Again, you can set up a system by writing a switch, but that's
>> likely slower and more code. 
>
> These are not "snags" - they are cases where the underlying integer
> value of the enumeration constants is sometimes helpful due to the
> limitations of the language.  Eventually, C++ will get some decent
> compile-time reflection capabilities that will allow you to generate
> strings from enumeration constants simply and easily, without repetition
> in the code (and without complicated X-macros).

Even for C++ scoped enumerations, each enumerator has a well defined
numeric value that can be specified in the declaration and accessed by
casting to an integer type.  This is part of the language-defined
semantics of the feature, not something that the language incorrectly
fails to hide.

I've personally found it annoying that a scoped enum can't be used as an
array index.  (Ada's enumeration types are distinct types, more strongly
typed than C++'s scoped enums, and they can be used as array
indices.  Of course neither C nor C++ is Ada, nor should they be.)

It's difficult to extend a weakly typed feature like C's enum and make
it reasonably type-safe without breaking things.  If C were to add a
more strongly typed enumeration feature, it would probably make sense to
adopt something very similar to what C++ has already done.

> In the meantime, C99, and C++ with gcc extensions (unfortunately not
> standard), let you write:
>
>
> typedef enum Colours { red, green, blue } Colours;
>
> extern const char * const colour_names[];
> const char * const colour_names[] = {
>     [red] = "red",
>     [green] = "green",
>     [blue] = "blue",
> };
>
> This does not use or rely on underlying integer values in any way -
> there is no need even to have the same order in the array definition as
> in the enumeration.
>
> For convenience (and for standard C++) you might define such an array
> without designated initialisers, but you are still trying to view the
> enumeration elements as abstract symbols, not as merely names for
> integer constants.

If you're going to be doing this a lot, it probably makes sense to
generate the table automatically.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

redeclaration of enumerators? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2021-09-27 10:39 -0700
  Re: redeclaration of enumerators? John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2021-09-28 16:21 -0500
    Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-28 14:57 -0700
      Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2021-09-28 15:23 -0700
        Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-29 15:23 +0200
        Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-09-30 01:15 -0700
      Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-28 23:31 +0100
        Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-29 15:36 +0200
          Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-29 15:03 +0100
            Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-29 16:46 +0200
              Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-09-29 16:08 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-29 20:14 +0200
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> - 2021-09-29 13:37 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-09-29 18:25 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-09-30 12:45 +0200
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-09-30 07:36 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-10-01 09:20 +0200
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-01 11:24 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 04:49 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-01 13:06 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Tony Oliver <guinness.tony@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 05:24 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-01 13:32 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 05:32 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-01 13:43 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Mark Bluemel <mark.bluemel@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 06:13 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 06:29 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-10-01 15:30 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 08:28 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2021-10-01 17:08 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 15:12 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-10-01 15:37 +0200
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-01 15:30 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-10-01 19:12 +0200
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-01 19:06 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-10-01 15:32 +0200
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-01 15:38 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-01 17:40 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-02 12:16 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-10-02 15:34 +0200
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2021-10-02 15:16 +0100
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 13:58 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2021-10-01 17:21 -0400
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-10-01 14:56 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-10-02 12:21 +0200
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2021-09-30 14:47 +0000
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2021-09-30 10:10 -0700
                Re: redeclaration of enumerators? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2021-10-01 09:24 +0200
            Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2021-09-29 12:43 -0700
    Re: redeclaration of enumerators? Branimir Maksimovic <branimir.maksimovic@gmail.com> - 2021-09-29 03:40 +0000

csiph-web