Constants instead of enum?

[wojtek@power.com.pl (Wojtek Narczynski)]

Hello,

I have the following situation: I read request record from network, an
Unsigned_8 (byte) denotes its type. Valid types are 1..10. Response
record has the same structure as request record. I also want to reuse
the memory allocated for request as the response. Now problem: for
every unimplemented request type (outside 1..10 range) I am supposed
to send a response record with type 11 back.

I am trying to use enumeration with representation clause for this,
but it just doesn't work. I read an Unsigned_8 from network, and all
its values are valid and should be handled gracefully, so I cannot use
this enum in the request structure. Because of this I have to convert
from Unsigned_8 to enumeration, but only sometimes. Then I have to use
unchecked conversion to get the enumeration's underlying Unsigned_8 to
store it in the response record (same structure and memory) as
request, so it has to be Unsigned_8.

If I defined types as constants for 1..11 range the amount of code
necessary and conversions will reduce.

So my question is - would this be fine to use a group of consts in
this specific case instead of an enum? I could encapsulate them into a
nested package.


Thanks,
Wojtek