This works

enum Test : bool
{
	yes = true,
	no = false
}
	
void TestIt(Test);

TestIt(Test.yes);


Is any one makeing use of it? It allows for more usefull nameing.

"BCS" <ao@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:55391cb32e20b8ca9ab3c6527b36@news.digitalmars.com...
>
> This works
>
> enum Test : bool
> {
> yes = true,
> no = false
> }
>
> void TestIt(Test);
>
> TestIt(Test.yes);
>
>
> Is any one makeing use of it? It allows for more usefull nameing.

Would've been funny if

enum MyBool : bool
{
    True,
    False,
    FileNotFound
}

worked but alas, the compiler (shockingly!) isn't buggy and errors on the overflow..

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2@yahoo.com> kirjoitti viestissä news:g2satg$2gl$1@digitalmars.com...
>
> Would've been funny if
>
> enum MyBool : bool
> {
>    True,
>    False,
>    FileNotFound
> }
>
> worked but alas, the compiler (shockingly!) isn't buggy and errors on the overflow..

Someone obviously reads the daily wtf... 

Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:

> "BCS" <ao@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:55391cb32e20b8ca9ab3c6527b36@news.digitalmars.com...
> >
> > This works
> >
> > enum Test : bool
> > {
> > yes = true,
> > no = false
> > }
> >
> > void TestIt(Test);
> >
> > TestIt(Test.yes);
> >
> >
> > Is any one makeing use of it? It allows for more usefull nameing.
> 
> Would've been funny if
> 
> enum MyBool : bool
> {
>     True,
>     False,
>     FileNotFound
> }
> 
> worked but alas, the compiler (shockingly!) isn't buggy and errors on the overflow..
> 
> 
Ok fellas so is there anything I can learn here?
Can I put this to use somehow ?
Is it showing a correct function or an incorrect one?
More detail please.

"Tower Ty" <towerty@msn.com.au> wrote in message news:g2ujs9$qv3$1@digitalmars.com...

> Ok fellas so is there anything I can learn here?
> Can I put this to use somehow ?
> Is it showing a correct function or an incorrect one?
> More detail please.

http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/What_Is_Truth_0x3f_.aspx

Classic example of code that's just... wow.  _That_ bad.

Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:

> "Tower Ty" <towerty@msn.com.au> wrote in message news:g2ujs9$qv3$1@digitalmars.com...
> 
> > Ok fellas so is there anything I can learn here?
> > Can I put this to use somehow ?
> > Is it showing a correct function or an incorrect one?
> > More detail please.
> 
> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/What_Is_Truth_0x3f_.aspx
> 
> Classic example of code that's just... wow.  _That_ bad.
> 
> 
Good Jarrett . Only two states on and off.
So you would be the man to make more of this . Our present day electronics are much more capable now of giving many more discernable positive states in charge from 0 to 5 volts ought be 6 steps of 1 volt or maybe 8 of a little less.

If we had 8 it would be stunning in speed and capacity . Like the DNA   UCAG codeing is much superior to on/off.

In your position I wonder if you pursue any thought along those lines?

"Tower Ty" <towerty@msn.com.au> wrote in message news:g31cir$16tt$1@digitalmars.com...

> Good Jarrett . Only two states on and off.
> So you would be the man to make more of this . Our present day electronics
> are much more capable now of giving many more discernable positive states
> in charge from 0 to 5 volts ought be 6 steps of 1 volt or maybe 8 of a
> little less.
>
> If we had 8 it would be stunning in speed and capacity . Like the DNA UCAG codeing is much superior to on/off.
>
> In your position I wonder if you pursue any thought along those lines?

I haven't, at least not much.  Though I think there might be some merit in analog computers that use a fully variable range of voltages (which bears a slight resemblance to how (we think) neurons work).

Then there are quantum computers where each qubit is 1, 0, or "something else" and I don't even want to _know_ what those are all about ;)

Reply to Tower,

> Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:
> 
>> "Tower Ty" <towerty@msn.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:g2ujs9$qv3$1@digitalmars.com...
>> 
>>> Ok fellas so is there anything I can learn here?
>>> Can I put this to use somehow ?
>>> Is it showing a correct function or an incorrect one?
>>> More detail please.
>> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/What_Is_Truth_0x3f_.aspx
>> 
>> Classic example of code that's just... wow.  _That_ bad.
>> 
> Good Jarrett . Only two states on and off.
> So you would be the man to make more of this . Our present day
> electronics are much more capable now of giving many more discernable
> positive states in charge from 0 to 5 volts ought be 6 steps of 1 volt
> or maybe 8 of a little less.
> If we had 8 it would be stunning in speed and capacity . Like the DNA
> UCAG codeing is much superior to on/off.
> 
> In your position I wonder if you pursue any thought along those lines?
> 

Analog computers have been built. They are much less tolerant to noise than digital ones. Also They /may/ get into some information theory issues there it becomes easier (less power etc.) to just pump up the clock speed than use more complex waveforms. (I know a guy who would know if anyone is interested)