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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,68038c52a7413447,start
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-06 10:30:09 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: jeff.huter@bigfoot.com (Jeff)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Enum or Named Number
Date: 6 Apr 2004 10:30:08 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: <fe4bb2c2.0404060930.f932668@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 143.182.124.4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1081272609 368 127.0.0.1 (6 Apr 2004 17:30:09 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 17:30:09 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:6776
Date: 2004-04-06T10:30:08-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Looking for implementation advise.  I'm writing a binding to some C
code that has several defined number macros (e.g. #define Viewable 1)
for states and flags.  I would like to bitwise-or these numbers in Ada
which leads me to believe I should define these as named mod numbers
such as below:

type State is mod 2**Interfaces.C.Int'Size
State1 : constant State := 2#0001#
State2 : constant State := 2#0010#
State3 : constant State := 2#0100#

Any reason to define these as an Enum with a representation clause? 
Seems like there would be more plumbing code.  For example, I believe
that I would need to write my own bitwise-or function for the Enum.

Is the named number implementation the way to go, or is there a better
way?