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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a415d3a613d86a4e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Jean-Pierre Rosen" <rosen.adalog@wanadoo.fr>
Subject: Re: Ada Enumerations
Date: 1997/12/06
Message-ID: <66c2rb$hdg$1@peuplier.wanadoo.fr>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 295798933
References: <662cs9$b34$1@newman.pcisys.net> <3486C057.6207@gsfc.nasa.gov>
 <mheaney-ya023680000412970941410001@news.ni.net> <dewar.881289148@merv>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
Organization: Adalog
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-12-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar said
>Matthew says
>
><<Good advice.  For low-level I/O, an enumeration type is often not what
you
>want anyway.  What's wrong with a good old fashioned integer type?
>>>
>
>For one thing, it provides operations like addition, which are probably
>meaningless nonsense.
>
Sure, but don't forget that you can forbid direct calls by redefining the
functions as abstract.

(Just taking the opportunity to remind people of that relatively unknown
feature)