1.       Yeah, let me explain: A lot of times (at least in the patterns that 
lead to enum usage in C++) you need to be able to know what is in the enum, for 
example, to iterate a list that will have exactly the same number of entries as 
the enum or something. In other words, the enum represents something, and often 
times you need to "enumerate" the enum. In C++, the only DRY way to do this is 
to add a "*_COUNT" entry as the last enum, which will conveniently result in 
that entry getting assigned a value equal to the number of entries, so you can 
do something like for(int i = 0; i < FOO_COUNT; i++) {}. I can't say for sure 
that we will or won't run into this in PHP, but the nature of enums makes these 
sorts of patters likely. The fix (I think) is to be able to inspect the enum. 
Probably need to support count(enumtype), as well as something like 
enum_ids(enumtype), enum_values(enumtype), and enum_to_array(enumtype).



2.       True, name as value is the only solution I see for that, but this 
would make the behavior radically different from the likely expectation. 
Sometimes it doesn't matter, but sometimes it will. I have some concern with 
something that LOOKS like an enum from other languages where enums are 
integral, but doesn't actually act integral. The other problem with 
non-integral enums is comparison, which users might expect to work by default. 
Unless this was implemented as a whole new type internally, comparison would be 
impossible. Implementing as a new type raises questions about implicit 
conversion, so that probably won't work.


5.       This is heavily connected to the typesafety question. A simple 
potential PHP example that comes to mind would be the Zend_Log class. This 
class has a list of priorities, which would make a whole lot of sense to put in 
an enum. (Incidentally an "enum_to_array()" method would then allow this code 
to be cleaned up a bit). The log method accepts priority as an argument, so it 
would be sensible to give this a type hint. The catch is that the class is also 
designed to allow new priorities to be added later, especially in a derived 
class, so, I derive a new My_Log class, and want to extend the enum with a 
couple of additional entries. (I actually worked with some code almost exactly 
like this just a few days ago). The bottom line here is that enums become a 
hinderance to inheritance unless they can be extended. If an enum can't be 
extended, it is effectively final, regardless of whether that is actually 
helpful.

John Crenshaw
Priacta, Inc.

From: Dennis Haarbrink [mailto:dhaarbr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 2:37 PM
To: John Crenshaw
Cc: internals@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RFC: Enum


2011/6/3 John Crenshaw 
<johncrens...@priacta.com<mailto:johncrens...@priacta.com>>
As much as I used enums in C++, I'm not sure that this is really the right tool 
here, and it often introduces more problems than it solves. Specific concerns 
that come to mind:

1. In C++ this often led to nasty needs such as a "LOG_LEVEL_COUNT" entry at 
the end of the list of enums.
2. Sometimes devs want to add items in the middle of the list for code 
organization purposes. This silently changes the values of the other constants 
and it isn't clear when that will or won't break stuff.
3. Better than half the time, enums seem to be a series of bit flags, not 
sequential numbers (in this case enum offers NO value over the current const 
lists).
4. The greatest value of enums in C++ is actually related to typesafety. 
Admittedly, this was sometimes more of a frustration than a help, but that was 
really just an implementation issue, not an inherent problem with enums and 
typesafety.
5. There is no clear path for extending the enums through inheritance.

Allowing enums to be (optionally) named would open a clear path to address 
counts and hinting, but still doesn't address the problems inherent in 
automatic numbering, and would complicate the inheritance question.

IMHO this should wait until we can address some of these items. Otherwise the 
feature is just a halfbaked not-so-short shorthand for constants.

John Crenshaw
Priacta, Inc.

--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php


1. I'm not so sure what you mean with that statement
2. A very strong argument for using the name of the constant as the default 
value
3 and 4: The way I see it, type safety is the *only* valid argument for 
proposing enums
5: I have never felt the need for inheritance in enums. Do you have a use case 
for that?

I also think that enums should always be named.

--
Dennis Haarbrink


Reply via email to