enums??

[NPcomplete]

Could someone explain what are enums, and how do we use them?

[LB]

Enums are deprecated, and you should not use them.

Enum Classes (aka Scoped Enums), however, are not deprecated, and are a way to create an enumeration of a limited number of possible values for new type.

enum struct EnemyType
{
    Ground,
    Flying,
    Ghost
};

The above enum class creates a new data type, known as EnemyType, which may only take on one of the values listed.

Enum classes can also be of a specific data type, read more here:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/enum

[NPcomplete]

thanks @L B
is it like typedef?
can i create a alpha numeric data type with it?

[Lowest0ne]

Enumerators can be found at the bottom of this page:
http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/other_data_types/

Typically, whenever you find yourself giving meaning to a number ( such as one equal January ), then you should consider using an enumerator.

You can also create "options" using enumerators, you see this a lot in windowing APIS:

enum
{
  bordered = 1,
  resizable = bordered << 1
};

// which allows ORing of the enumerator:
myWindowOptions = resizable | bordered;

They are not typedefs. It's more like you are creating a new type.

[IWishIKnew]

LB Wrote

Enums are deprecated, and you should not use them.

What should you use instead of enums?

[LB]

Just a note, enum classes are also referred to as scoped enums, because the enum type shown by LowestOne does not follow scope rules intuitively.

[Dy7SLyTq]

why are enums deprecated? they still have plenty of uses and make my data more organized. i dont need them, but it would make it a lot harder and a lot more code to use other things

[LB]

Enum Classes, aka Scoped Enums, are not deprecated. Regular Enums are deprecated.

[JLBorges]

AFAIK, unscoped enumerations are not deprecated.

[LB]

Ah, I guess I had just assumed they were. Oh well, I still don't like unscoped enums :)

[JLBorges]

I think an unscoped enum at namespace, class or function scope ought to be perfectly acceptable.

namespace calendar
{
      enum month_t { JAN = 0, FEB /* ... */ };
      // ...
}

struct book
{
      enum binding_t { PAPERBACK, HARDCOVER, SPIRAL, NONE };
      // ...
};

// etc.. 

[LB]

But it still is implicitly convertible to an int and not its own type, which is why I don't like it.

[Dy7SLyTq]

the point of an enum isnt to create a new type. its to help make data a bit easier to read, like with sfml video modes, instead of just doing ints. if you want to make a type use a data structure

[LB]

Why are you arguing with my opinion?

[Lowest0ne]

But it still is implicitly convertible to an int and not its own type, which is why I don't like it.

However, when any integer is a valid argument, then this conversion is helpful:

struct Color
{
  enum {
    Red   = 0xFF0000,
    Green = 0x00FF00,
    Blue  = 0x0000FF
  };
};

// allows
function( Color::Red );
function( 0xFFFFFF );   // oops, forgot white 

[LB]

You shouldn't use an enumeration for that, those should be constant variables. I'm really against the idea of assigning specific values to enumeration elements.

[Catfish666]

But it still is implicitly convertible to an int and not its own type, which is why I don't like it.

In my C code I would be doing something like this:

enum Colors
{
    Red,
    White,
    Blue
};

void pixel_draw(int x, int y, enum Colors c);

If another programmer willingly disregards the signature of that function, then the problems are much greater than anything a "proper" enum type could fix.

[LB]

That's not the point; with scoped enums having their own type, you can do proper function overloading. I'd like to see that with regular enums.

[Dy7SLyTq]

i feel like ive had this argument with fred before... its not the point of enums to supply that. its job is to make data a bit more clear, like typedef

[LB]

I'm also not a fan of weak type aliases, I would prefer strong type aliases.