Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
noatom

Enum doesn't occupy any space in an object?

This topic is 1883 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

So,if I define an enum like:

 

class x{
public:
enum{
hey=0
};

}

 

Is it true that it doesn't occupy any space? And if yes,why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement

It's just a definition. Until you define a member variable it won't occupy any space.

 

class MyBigClass

{

    char aBigArray[1000000];

};

 

uses no space until you instantiate one (by decalring a variable of type MyBigClass).

Edited by Paradigm Shifter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are just telling the compiler you are going to use the symbol `x::hey' as meaning 0. That may or may not "occupy any space", depending on what exactly you mean by that. (The size of an object of type x will not be larger because of the enum, the executable will not be larger (except maybe for debugging info), but the source code will use more space, and the compiler will use more memory.)

Edited by Álvaro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks,got it.I was refering to using that code I showed you instead of a const inside a class.

 

So,Inside the class I could write int es[hey];

 

So should I use enums like that in a class instead of a static const if I need to write code like the array above? I understand that the performance I get by doing this is...very small,but just as a concept,is it better?

 

Ofcourse,I could just use int es[10],but when I need the same constant value in many places in a class,defining an enum like the one above,or a static const,might help understand the code faster.

Edited by noatom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Variants of a compile-time constant has no effect on the run-time, because it is compile-time only. So not only is it very small, but exactly zero run-time performance difference. Design-wise... well, that's a different question and depends on what the constant is used for and what it represents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Enumerations should be used for groups of related values; if you're using a single-entry enum for a constant, you're going to confuse most people. I suggest sticking with actual constants instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The code should reflect the intent as closely as possible. If you want a constant, use a constant.

Also, if you gave use a piece of code with meaningful identifiers, we would be in a much better position to make good suggestions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!