From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b0d68c502c0ae6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: Printing Enum Variable Re: Linux World
Date: 1999/03/03
Message-ID: <1999Mar3.073527.1@eisner>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 450735693
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: eisner.decus.org
References: <7bfc2n$jl9@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com> <7bhh26$r7c$1@remarQ.com>
 <36DCAC1F.430E2C5E@aasaa.ofe.org>
X-Trace: news.decus.org 920464529 18889 KILGALLEN [192.67.173.2]
Organization: LJK Software
Reply-To: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-03-03T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <36DCAC1F.430E2C5E@aasaa.ofe.org>, David Starner <dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org> writes:

> IMO, printing enumerator literals, as is, is a quick and dirty hack that
> should be used only if you're the only user. It's not C's fault for
> leaving it out; it would be inappropriate with C's model of enumerated
> variables, IMO. (How should you print a value that doesn't have an
> associated name, for instance?)

I think that is part of the point -- that C allows values without an
associated name.

Larry Kilgallen