"toString(enum.value)" How?

[Ingo Oeser]

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> Furthermore, EnumValue.stringof would have to give a string
> representation of the actual enum value, rather than a string of the type
> as it does now

That behavior would be perfect! This is also much better that min/max, 
since enums can contain holes. Enums are just a set of valid symbols
with defined ordering within a scope.

> (I think .stringof is still not 100% finished anyway..).  With those two
> abilities, generating some kind of lookup table at compile-time would be
> very easy indeed.

And is very much needed. Just look how often that kind of stuff is
implemented! Maybe we can have the best of both worlds and just
get a string[enum foo] from any named enum, where we can iterate 
either through the keys or through the values.

> But of course as Jason pointed out, one issue is with flag enums.

They are nothing else but additional values for me.
Consider:

enum Foo {
        bar = 1,
        baz = 2,
        boo = 4,
        all = bar | baz | boo,
}

Foo.all is just an additional valid value. The way it is composed is
nothing else but an implementation detail, which can change.

> I'd even go so far as to say that the
> use of an enum as a simple list of constants and the use of an enum as a
> list of flags is divergent enough to warrant a new language construct
> i.e. "flags

Yes, that is a completely new semantic, which is called "set" :-)
Ok, that is actually a "set of enum values" which might be an interesting
specialisation for the set template :-)

We don't have that semantic now. But we have enums and they miss a useful
method. That is my point. 

Maybe I should forward that thread to the "D"
newsgroup?

Best Regards

Ingo Oeser