Adam Ruppe: > I think I'm for this. If you provide a name with no base type, > it should work like this.
Why do you suggest to disallow implicit conversions (and use strong typing) only if the enum definition doesn't specify a base type? > Bearophile, have you considered making a pull request? I think I am not able to do that yet. > I imagine if any code breaks, it'd be easy enough to fix with > changing to the item or inserting a cast. Recently I have discussed safe enum conversions too. In some cases it's good to replace cast() with a to!. http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=142862 Bye, bearophile
