Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #13145
| From | Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast |
| References | <99gag79ess5jgiiap1da1ggotvh8sv55is@4ax.com> <je3l5m$12g$1@dont-email.me> <b75672b2-04e7-4002-8655-b27d2b3f497c@o14g2000vbo.googlegroups.com> <je57i1$4af$1@dont-email.me> |
| Date | 2012-01-06 06:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <87mxa1z6eg.fsf@gmail.com> (permalink) |
"Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> writes:
> That's just bad programmers.
>
> C has had 'enum' since C89.
>
> 'enum' works nicely for expressing whatever integer real constants.
I didn't say it was right, I said that where it came from. In any case
I'd be willing bet
#define NUM_OBJ 100
is much more prevalent than
enum {
num_obj = 100
};
even in C code written in the last five years. Idioms are hard to
kill. (I'll admit that I'm among them - type safety concerns means I
tend to set compiler switches so that I get warned about int-to-enum
comparisons and enum-to-other-enum comparisons, so this technique
doesn't even *work* for me)
Either way, the convention did not cross from Java to C++, it went
entered C++ and Java from the common ancestor, C.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
plz xplain behavior of const_cast Heck <heckja_in@ordertostymieharvestersverizon.net> - 2012-01-05 02:01 -0500
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2012-01-05 08:53 +0100
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 08:57 +0100
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 04:00 -0800
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-01-05 23:17 +0100
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-06 11:38 +1300
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 06:33 +0000
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-01-06 00:46 -0800
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-01-06 03:19 -0800
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2012-01-07 06:38 +0000
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-01-07 03:53 -0800
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-01-06 09:14 +0000
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast Goran <goran.pusic@gmail.com> - 2012-01-04 23:55 -0800
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast jt@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) - 2012-01-05 09:04 +0000
Re: plz xplain behavior of const_cast Heck <heckja_in@ordertostymieharvestersverizon.net> - 2012-01-05 09:36 -0500
csiph-web