Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulation of scoped enums

Subject: Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulation of scoped enums
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-03-06 01:31:34

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matt Calabrese" <rivorus_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 1:26 AM
Subject: Re: [boost] [C++0x] Emulation of scoped enums

> 
>>
>> I wouldn't. If you really want to use one macro only, I would use the
>> PP sequence
>> instead.
>>
> 
> I'm gonna be the rebel and say that I think how it's currently implemented
> is [unfortunately] the most functional and most portable option, though I
> guess there is no harm in supplying a couple of interfaces as long as it
> doesn't make things too confusing for users. The problem with using a PP
> sequence is that you are going to hit a hard limit of 256 elements, meaning
> you have to at least support the current interface as an option otherwise
> you rule out using the macro for enums with a large number of constants.
> This also makes things frustrating for users if their enum starts below 256
> in size and then over time approaches the limit. That means they would then
> have to go back and switch from using preprocessor sequences to the original
> style interface (or use a version of Boost.Preprocessor with higher limits).
> As for using variadic macros, you need either a compiler that supports them
> as an extension for C++, or an 0x compiler. While I agree that the current
> interface is kind of ugly, I still think it's the best option available.

I agree,

The _START _END version has a little inconvenient, but a lot of advanteges.

Vicente