Re: [Discussion] Implicitly backed enums

On 22/05/2024 00:31, Larry Garfield wrote:

I could see an argument for auto-populating the backing value off the enum name if it's not specified, something like this: enum Options: string { case First; // This implicitly gets "First" case Second = '2nd'; }

This seems like a reasonable compromise. In this case, all I need to do is change my enum to a backed enum (suffix : string) and I get the benefits of implicit values. I still like the idea of the same being possible for non-backed enums, though I imagine that is a product of my naïveté, as I do not tend to think of things in the framing of (de)serialization.

I'm not sure if I'd support it myself at the moment

Noted, but I once again find myself needing to ask: why not? Were it up to me, I'd say let's start right now! :) Aside, I am not at all concerned with integer-backed enums at this juncture, and presume that could be a separate discussion/implementation anyway. Cheers, Bilge