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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 2002:a24:de44:: with SMTP id d65mr3336517itg.137.1559892722530; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 00:32:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a9d:6f01:: with SMTP id n1mr11650460otq.276.1559892722290; Fri, 07 Jun 2019 00:32:02 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.gegeweb.eu!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.166.215.MISMATCH!s188no178764itb.0!news-out.google.com!l126ni241itl.0!nntp.google.com!g15no172742itd.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 00:32:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=165.225.84.70; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.225.84.70 References: User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <60027108-2b92-417e-8083-eef19cc1e64a@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: C++ diaries... From: Maciej Sobczak Injection-Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 07:32:02 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:56532 Date: 2019-06-07T00:32:01-07:00 List-Id: > ... now changing my 'burning genuine enums' for new 'enum classes' is bre= aking old code at 52 spots (from that change uses of enums as integer based= index becomes illegal and need to be 'static_casted' to work) ... so much = for productivity. You would be much more productive if you used non-clashing constant names. = Actually, that would be even faster than writing these posts here. :-D And you might be more likely to stay in line with those coding standards th= at actually forbid enumeration overloading. Which brings another question: what is the problem, actually? The fact that= old enums don't support overloading, the fact that transitioning to new la= nguage features requires changes in old code or the fact that there are two= kinds of enums in the first place? I agree that this third fact is somewha= t cumbersome, but since there is no obligation to use the new one, it shoul= d not be a show stopper. --=20 Maciej Sobczak * http://www.inspirel.com