On Wednesday, September 01, 2010 12:59:01 Nick Sabalausky wrote: > "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.33.1283368612.858.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > > > Personally, I don't really care about using enum the way it is. Having > > enums > > freely converting to and from their base type is more of a concern, > > though I'm > > not sure how much that really does or doesn't matter. > > I find it to be a pain nearly every time I need to convert one to a string.
I wasn't even aware that there was a way. If I had to guess, I would assume that it involves stringof, but I'd have to try it. Now, assuming that that's the case, it would be pretty easy to write a template function which takes the enum type and the value to stringify, and it returns the string version of that enum value (or throws if it's not a valid value for that enum type). I can see how having it as a distinct type would be more desirable for that though, since then you could likely just use stringof on it directly. - Jonathan M Davis
