multiple enums in single class
Hi Experts,
I have a class that should have two different enums.
class Controller
{
enum { CmdOne, CmdTwo, CmdThree, etc };
enum { ValueOne, ValueTwo, ValueThree, etc };
}
When I use them, I want them to be accessed differently( just pointing out they are from different groups)
for example, now, there is no difference between Controller::CmdOne and Controller::ValueOne,
I have a class that should have two different enums.
class Controller
{
enum { CmdOne, CmdTwo, CmdThree, etc };
enum { ValueOne, ValueTwo, ValueThree, etc };
}
When I use them, I want them to be accessed differently( just pointing out they are from different groups)
for example, now, there is no difference between Controller::CmdOne and Controller::ValueOne,
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
ASKER
Thank you. Is it a "normal" way of doing it?
Yes; it is more typical to name them as described than not, and better practice in most cases. That is because naming them also clarifies what they are.
ASKER
Thank you both. I also see some references to using namespace to achieve this. However, the enum is declared outside the class. Which one would be better?
namespace Cmd
{
enum { One, Two, Three };
}
namespace Value
{
enum { One, Two, Three };
}
class Controller
{
};
namespace Cmd
{
enum { One, Two, Three };
}
namespace Value
{
enum { One, Two, Three };
}
class Controller
{
};
SOLUTION
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
ambuli,
You've accepted http:#a37086873 but that won't actually work in standards compliant C++ since the enum's name does not provide a namespace for the enum values.
>>Thank you. Is it a "normal" way of doing it?
If you are referring to my answer, yes it is a common C++ idiom to encapsulate an enum in a struct. You can, as Slimfinger observes, also use a namespace but that doesn't work so well if you are doing generic programming (you can't pass a namespace as a type to a template). It is; therefore, more common to use a struct to give your enum a named scope.
You've accepted http:#a37086873 but that won't actually work in standards compliant C++ since the enum's name does not provide a namespace for the enum values.
>>Thank you. Is it a "normal" way of doing it?
If you are referring to my answer, yes it is a common C++ idiom to encapsulate an enum in a struct. You can, as Slimfinger observes, also use a namespace but that doesn't work so well if you are doing generic programming (you can't pass a namespace as a type to a template). It is; therefore, more common to use a struct to give your enum a named scope.
class Controller
{
enum X { CmdOne, CmdTwo, CmdThree, etc };
enum Y { ValueOne, ValueTwo, ValueThree, etc };
};
Controller::X::CmdOne
Controller::Y::ValueOne