On 23 May 2017 at 15:12, Kjell Ahlstedt <kjellahlst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't understand how you can have, for instance > void f(ResponseType r); > if ResponseType is an uninstantiable class. If ResponseType is the name of > a class, and you want to treat it as if it were the name an enum, wouldn't > it require something like > D'oh. Right! Carry on. :) The language seems to make this overcomplicated. I need to search for info on whether anyone ever proposed a scoped but implicitly convertible enum, and if so, why it never got anywhere.
_______________________________________________ gtkmm-list mailing list gtkmm-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtkmm-list
