Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #162860
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: redeclaration of enumerators? |
| Date | 2021-09-28 14:57 -0700 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <8735pojrc3.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | <a81bc0a9-beb2-4ec9-9c07-d1a3985b746an@googlegroups.com> <sj010b$715$1@dont-email.me> |
John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> writes:
> On 9/27/21 12:39 PM, Thiago Adams wrote:
>> I was wondering if we have some reason to
>> disallow redeclaration of identical (name/value) enumerators.
>> enum E1 { A = 1 };
>> enum E2 { A = 1 };
>
> Unlike structs and unions, each enum type is not its own
> namespace and enumeration constants belong to the "ordinary
> identifiers" namespace.
>
> The question is how you would disambiguate the two definitions
> of A - there's no equivalent to the '.' or '->' operators for
> enums. There's no way to easily say "I'm talking about the A
> defined for enum E1, not the A defined for enum E2".
>
> Can't rely on type inference in assignments; enums are just an
> incredibly weak abstraction in C. There's no range checking
> such that you can only assign one of the defined enumeration
> constants to an object of that enum type.
>
> You'd either need to introduce a C++-style scoping operator like
> E1::A or E2::A, or you'd need to radically revamp and strengthen
> enum semantics. And in the process you'd likely lose some capability
> that people find incredibly useful, such as bitwise-ORing enumeration
> constants together.
>
> enums in C are little more than a way to create symbolic constants for
> integer values. They are not really *enumerated types* like you
> find in other languages.
I think the suggestion is to allow duplicate names only if both the name
and the value happen to match. Thiago's example:
enum E1 { A = 1 };
enum E2 { A = 1 };
would be valid, but changing one of the values:
enum E1 { A = 1 };
enum E2 { A = 2 };
would result in a constraint violation. (I presume the same would apply
if the values are chosen implicitly.)
There's no fundamental reason this couldn't be done, but I don't think
it's useful enough to justify a language change. If you want two enum
types to share values, you can define them as a single type.
(C++ does have an "enum class" feature which, among other things, allows
for duplicate names, but then you always need to refer to "E1::A"
whether it's ambiguous or not.)
--
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 | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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