From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-01 09:28:09
"Aleksey Gurtovoy" <agurtovoy_at_[hidden]> wrote
> Larry Evans writes:
> > Is the following supposed to compile:
> >
> > enum
> > visitor_numerals
> > { visitor_n0
> > , visitor_n1
> > };
> >
> > typedef mpl::vector_c<visitor_numerals,visitor_n0> vec_viz_type;
> > typedef mpl::at_c<vec_viz_type,0>::type vec_viz0_type;
>
> Theoretically, I see no good reason to disallow it.
I think that one major problem is that you promise next<> and prev<> on
integrals. It would be quite problematic to satisfy this for enums staying
in the same enum type.
Regards,
Arkadiy