Dave Abrahams wrote
on Mon Dec 12 2011, Vicente Botet <vicente.botet-AT-wanadoo.fr> wrote:
Daryle Walker wrote
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:55:33 +0000 From: dnljms@
On 12 December 2011 12:46, Daryle Walker <darylew@> wrote:
Should we add preprocessor stuff to conditionally use the C++11 "enum
class" construct?
We have something like that already:
Reading it, it doesn't have any base type and/or forward-declaration facilities.
How do you want to be able to use forward declaration in a portable way?
There are also scoped enums with underlying type that are no enum class.
Not in C++11. There are unscoped enums with underlying type, but the way you get scoping is to use "enum class."
You are right. I don't know why I thought that there was the possibility to declare an scoped enum that has implicit conversion to the underlying type. My bad. IMO scope and convertibility are orthogonal. Do you know why this combination was not retained? Thanks, Vicente -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/Add-macros-for-the-enum-class-concept-tp4... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.