Re: [boost] Re: IOStreams formal review start

From: Rob Stewart (stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-10 14:06:22

From: "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews_at_[hidden]>
> 
> There's one last problem. The file
> boost/io/detail/streambufs/indirect_streambufs contains this code:
> 
>     enum {
>         f_open             = 1,
>         f_input_closed     = f_open << 1,
>         f_output_closed    = f_input_closed << 1,
>         f_output_buffered  = f_output_closed
>     };
> 
> This should be
> 
>     enum {
>         f_open             = 1,
>         f_input_closed     = f_open << 1,
>         f_output_closed    = f_input_closed << 1,
>         f_output_buffered  = f_output_closed << 1
>     };

This is a pain to read and maintain.  You should write them like
this:

enum
{
   f_open            = 1<<0,
   f_input_closed    = 1<<1,
   f_output_closed   = 1<<2,
   f_output_buffered = 1<<3
};

You can easily spot that the values are in ascending order and
you don't have to replicate the name of the preceding enumerator
(which would make reordering a pain, should that be needed).

-- 
Rob Stewart                           stewart_at_[hidden]
Software Engineer                     http://www.sig.com
Susquehanna International Group, LLP  using std::disclaimer;