Boost :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

From: Paul Mensonides (pmenso57_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-07 19:13:43

Next message: Gennaro Prota: "[boost] max, min, width, precision, promotion and other toys (0/1)"
Previous message: Larry Evans: "Re: [boost] Shared_ptr "mini garbage collector""
In reply to: Paul Mensonides: "Re: [boost] Re: Metaprogramming: Using static const or enum?"
Next in thread: Terje Slettebø: "Re: [boost] Re: Metaprogramming: Using static const or enum?"
Reply: Terje Slettebø: "Re: [boost] Re: Metaprogramming: Using static const or enum?"

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Mensonides" <pmenso57_at_[hidden]>

> Just my 2 cents.

Make that 3 cents...

In summary, enumerations are distinct types and therefore can interfere with
the rest of the language. Particularly, constant expressions, overloading,
operator overloading, template type deduction, etc.. Personally, I think
that is a strong case *against* using enumerations.

Paul Mensonides

Next message: Gennaro Prota: "[boost] max, min, width, precision, promotion and other toys (0/1)"
Previous message: Larry Evans: "Re: [boost] Shared_ptr "mini garbage collector""
In reply to: Paul Mensonides: "Re: [boost] Re: Metaprogramming: Using static const or enum?"
Next in thread: Terje Slettebø: "Re: [boost] Re: Metaprogramming: Using static const or enum?"
Reply: Terje Slettebø: "Re: [boost] Re: Metaprogramming: Using static const or enum?"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk