R. David Murray wrote:
> The first False looks correct to me, I would not expect an enum value to
> be an instance of the class that holds it as an attribute. The second
> certainly looks odd, but what does it even mean to have an instance of
> an Enum class?
This attitude baffles me. In most other languages having a
notion of an enum, when you define an enum, you're defining
a type. The name of the enum is the name of the type, and
its values are instances of that type.
Why should our enums be any different?
--
Greg
