"Rob Stewart" <stewart@sig.com> wrote in message
From: "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com>
"Rob Stewart" <stewart@sig.com> wrote in message:
From: "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@kangaroologic.com>
Yours/John's Mine enum { name_a = 1, 1<<0, name_b = name_a << 1, 1<<1, name_c = name_b << 1 1<<2 };
Now add name_x after name_b:
enum { name_a = 1, 1<<0, name_b = name_a << 1, 1<<1, name_x = name_b << 1, 1<<2, name_c = name_x << 1 1<<3 };
Your version requires a more extensive change
True -- if there are only three enumerators!
How does the number of enumerators matter?
With my method, when you stick an enumerator into the middle, you only have to adjust the definitions of the adjacent enumerators. With your method, it looks to me like you have to renumber all the enumerators which follow the insertion point. Best Regards, Jonathan