Is there a way to specify an enum-class value without having to type out its scope every time?












1















I have some functions that can return either success or one of a fixed set of error codes. To identify the error codes, I had (something like) this old-school C-style enum declared:



enum {
RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
RESULT_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
RESULT_SUCCESS = 0
};
typedef int my_status_t;

my_status_t MyFunc(); // returns a RESULT_* value


This worked pretty well; the calling pattern would be something like:



if (MyFunc() != RESULT_SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


... however it was uncomfortably permissive about allowing implicit conversions of my_status_t values to int/bool/etc, allowing careless mistakes like this:



// Compiles but does the wrong thing at run-time -- bad!
if (MyFunc() == false) printf("Error!n");


... so in my new code revision, I converted it to be an enum class instead:



enum class my_status_t {
RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
RESULT_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
RESULT_SUCCESS = 0
};


... this works great from a compile-time checking perspective; now most unintentional type-promotions are caught by the compiler, forcing the programmer to go back and do it the right way.



The only thing that bothers me is that the new syntax is tedious: now I have to write something like:



if (MyFunc() != my_status_t::RESULT_SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


... at every call site -- having to type out my_status_t:: each time is tedious and makes the code harder to read, without really adding much value (since RESULT_SUCCESS is sufficiently unique for my purposes on its own, anyway)



My question is, is there some kind of using namespace my_status_t; style directive I could use to tell the compiler to export the enum-values out of their my_status_t namespace, so that I could reference them without having to type the my_status_t:: prefix all the time?










share|improve this question





























    1















    I have some functions that can return either success or one of a fixed set of error codes. To identify the error codes, I had (something like) this old-school C-style enum declared:



    enum {
    RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
    RESULT_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
    RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
    RESULT_SUCCESS = 0
    };
    typedef int my_status_t;

    my_status_t MyFunc(); // returns a RESULT_* value


    This worked pretty well; the calling pattern would be something like:



    if (MyFunc() != RESULT_SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


    ... however it was uncomfortably permissive about allowing implicit conversions of my_status_t values to int/bool/etc, allowing careless mistakes like this:



    // Compiles but does the wrong thing at run-time -- bad!
    if (MyFunc() == false) printf("Error!n");


    ... so in my new code revision, I converted it to be an enum class instead:



    enum class my_status_t {
    RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
    RESULT_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
    RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
    RESULT_SUCCESS = 0
    };


    ... this works great from a compile-time checking perspective; now most unintentional type-promotions are caught by the compiler, forcing the programmer to go back and do it the right way.



    The only thing that bothers me is that the new syntax is tedious: now I have to write something like:



    if (MyFunc() != my_status_t::RESULT_SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


    ... at every call site -- having to type out my_status_t:: each time is tedious and makes the code harder to read, without really adding much value (since RESULT_SUCCESS is sufficiently unique for my purposes on its own, anyway)



    My question is, is there some kind of using namespace my_status_t; style directive I could use to tell the compiler to export the enum-values out of their my_status_t namespace, so that I could reference them without having to type the my_status_t:: prefix all the time?










    share|improve this question



























      1












      1








      1


      0






      I have some functions that can return either success or one of a fixed set of error codes. To identify the error codes, I had (something like) this old-school C-style enum declared:



      enum {
      RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
      RESULT_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
      RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
      RESULT_SUCCESS = 0
      };
      typedef int my_status_t;

      my_status_t MyFunc(); // returns a RESULT_* value


      This worked pretty well; the calling pattern would be something like:



      if (MyFunc() != RESULT_SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


      ... however it was uncomfortably permissive about allowing implicit conversions of my_status_t values to int/bool/etc, allowing careless mistakes like this:



      // Compiles but does the wrong thing at run-time -- bad!
      if (MyFunc() == false) printf("Error!n");


      ... so in my new code revision, I converted it to be an enum class instead:



      enum class my_status_t {
      RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
      RESULT_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
      RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
      RESULT_SUCCESS = 0
      };


      ... this works great from a compile-time checking perspective; now most unintentional type-promotions are caught by the compiler, forcing the programmer to go back and do it the right way.



      The only thing that bothers me is that the new syntax is tedious: now I have to write something like:



      if (MyFunc() != my_status_t::RESULT_SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


      ... at every call site -- having to type out my_status_t:: each time is tedious and makes the code harder to read, without really adding much value (since RESULT_SUCCESS is sufficiently unique for my purposes on its own, anyway)



      My question is, is there some kind of using namespace my_status_t; style directive I could use to tell the compiler to export the enum-values out of their my_status_t namespace, so that I could reference them without having to type the my_status_t:: prefix all the time?










      share|improve this question
















      I have some functions that can return either success or one of a fixed set of error codes. To identify the error codes, I had (something like) this old-school C-style enum declared:



      enum {
      RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
      RESULT_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
      RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
      RESULT_SUCCESS = 0
      };
      typedef int my_status_t;

      my_status_t MyFunc(); // returns a RESULT_* value


      This worked pretty well; the calling pattern would be something like:



      if (MyFunc() != RESULT_SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


      ... however it was uncomfortably permissive about allowing implicit conversions of my_status_t values to int/bool/etc, allowing careless mistakes like this:



      // Compiles but does the wrong thing at run-time -- bad!
      if (MyFunc() == false) printf("Error!n");


      ... so in my new code revision, I converted it to be an enum class instead:



      enum class my_status_t {
      RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
      RESULT_ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
      RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
      RESULT_SUCCESS = 0
      };


      ... this works great from a compile-time checking perspective; now most unintentional type-promotions are caught by the compiler, forcing the programmer to go back and do it the right way.



      The only thing that bothers me is that the new syntax is tedious: now I have to write something like:



      if (MyFunc() != my_status_t::RESULT_SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


      ... at every call site -- having to type out my_status_t:: each time is tedious and makes the code harder to read, without really adding much value (since RESULT_SUCCESS is sufficiently unique for my purposes on its own, anyway)



      My question is, is there some kind of using namespace my_status_t; style directive I could use to tell the compiler to export the enum-values out of their my_status_t namespace, so that I could reference them without having to type the my_status_t:: prefix all the time?







      c++ c++11 enums namespaces






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Nov 21 '18 at 18:53









      Yakk - Adam Nevraumont

      187k20199383




      187k20199383










      asked Nov 21 '18 at 15:18









      Jeremy FriesnerJeremy Friesner

      39.8k1080164




      39.8k1080164
























          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1














          If you going to be typing a lot more of the nuisance scope-prefixes than there
          are constants in the enum class, then it may be worth your while to go with this
          way:



          enum class result {
          ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
          ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
          ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
          SUCCESS = 0
          };

          constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER;
          constexpr result RESULT_FILE_NOT_FOUND = result::ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND;
          constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = result::ERROR_GENERAL;
          constexpr result RESULT_SUCCESS = result::SUCCESS;

          result foo() {
          return RESULT_SUCCESS;
          }

          int main()
          {
          switch (foo())
          {
          case RESULT_SUCCESS:
          ;
          }
          // ^ warning: enumeration value ‘...’ not handled in ...

          if (foo() == RESULT_SUCCESS) {
          return 0;
          }

          /* error: no match for ‘operator==’
          if (foo() == false) {
          return -1;
          }
          */
          }


          (g++ -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -std=c++11)






          share|improve this answer

































            0














            Do this change:



            enum class result {
            ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
            ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
            ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
            SUCCESS = 0
            };


            because your enumerated values are in a scope, you no longer have to give them as long a name.



            Now your code becomes:



            if (MyFunc() != result::SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


            which is a whole 1 character longer than before.



            You could also



            using my_status_t = result;


            if you are tied to my_status_t as a type name.





            As of C++17 there is no way to cleanly avoid the result:: prefix. There is talk about using ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER; or the like in later versions of C++, but I'm unaware if they are going to get into c++20.






            share|improve this answer


























            • What I'm looking for is the ability to avoid the something:: prefix.

              – Jeremy Friesner
              Nov 21 '18 at 19:21



















            0














            Here's a way:



            enum class my_status_t { };

            inline constexpr my_status_t RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = my_status_t(-3);
            // add other enum values here


            Unfortunately, this way you lose some good properties of enum. Like compiler can warn you if you don't handle a value in a switch (and don't forget to set the underlying type of enum class, if you have big values).



            So I actually don't recommend this way (I better like Yakk's solution), but maybe this answer can help you anyway...






            share|improve this answer























              Your Answer






              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
              StackExchange.snippets.init();
              });
              });
              }, "code-snippets");

              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "1"
              };
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
              createEditor();
              });
              }
              else {
              createEditor();
              }
              });

              function createEditor() {
              StackExchange.prepareEditor({
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: true,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: 10,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader: {
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              },
              onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53415177%2fis-there-a-way-to-specify-an-enum-class-value-without-having-to-type-out-its-sco%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              1














              If you going to be typing a lot more of the nuisance scope-prefixes than there
              are constants in the enum class, then it may be worth your while to go with this
              way:



              enum class result {
              ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
              ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
              ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
              SUCCESS = 0
              };

              constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER;
              constexpr result RESULT_FILE_NOT_FOUND = result::ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND;
              constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = result::ERROR_GENERAL;
              constexpr result RESULT_SUCCESS = result::SUCCESS;

              result foo() {
              return RESULT_SUCCESS;
              }

              int main()
              {
              switch (foo())
              {
              case RESULT_SUCCESS:
              ;
              }
              // ^ warning: enumeration value ‘...’ not handled in ...

              if (foo() == RESULT_SUCCESS) {
              return 0;
              }

              /* error: no match for ‘operator==’
              if (foo() == false) {
              return -1;
              }
              */
              }


              (g++ -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -std=c++11)






              share|improve this answer






























                1














                If you going to be typing a lot more of the nuisance scope-prefixes than there
                are constants in the enum class, then it may be worth your while to go with this
                way:



                enum class result {
                ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
                ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
                ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
                SUCCESS = 0
                };

                constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER;
                constexpr result RESULT_FILE_NOT_FOUND = result::ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND;
                constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = result::ERROR_GENERAL;
                constexpr result RESULT_SUCCESS = result::SUCCESS;

                result foo() {
                return RESULT_SUCCESS;
                }

                int main()
                {
                switch (foo())
                {
                case RESULT_SUCCESS:
                ;
                }
                // ^ warning: enumeration value ‘...’ not handled in ...

                if (foo() == RESULT_SUCCESS) {
                return 0;
                }

                /* error: no match for ‘operator==’
                if (foo() == false) {
                return -1;
                }
                */
                }


                (g++ -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -std=c++11)






                share|improve this answer




























                  1












                  1








                  1







                  If you going to be typing a lot more of the nuisance scope-prefixes than there
                  are constants in the enum class, then it may be worth your while to go with this
                  way:



                  enum class result {
                  ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
                  ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
                  ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
                  SUCCESS = 0
                  };

                  constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER;
                  constexpr result RESULT_FILE_NOT_FOUND = result::ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND;
                  constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = result::ERROR_GENERAL;
                  constexpr result RESULT_SUCCESS = result::SUCCESS;

                  result foo() {
                  return RESULT_SUCCESS;
                  }

                  int main()
                  {
                  switch (foo())
                  {
                  case RESULT_SUCCESS:
                  ;
                  }
                  // ^ warning: enumeration value ‘...’ not handled in ...

                  if (foo() == RESULT_SUCCESS) {
                  return 0;
                  }

                  /* error: no match for ‘operator==’
                  if (foo() == false) {
                  return -1;
                  }
                  */
                  }


                  (g++ -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -std=c++11)






                  share|improve this answer















                  If you going to be typing a lot more of the nuisance scope-prefixes than there
                  are constants in the enum class, then it may be worth your while to go with this
                  way:



                  enum class result {
                  ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
                  ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
                  ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
                  SUCCESS = 0
                  };

                  constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER;
                  constexpr result RESULT_FILE_NOT_FOUND = result::ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND;
                  constexpr result RESULT_ERROR_GENERAL = result::ERROR_GENERAL;
                  constexpr result RESULT_SUCCESS = result::SUCCESS;

                  result foo() {
                  return RESULT_SUCCESS;
                  }

                  int main()
                  {
                  switch (foo())
                  {
                  case RESULT_SUCCESS:
                  ;
                  }
                  // ^ warning: enumeration value ‘...’ not handled in ...

                  if (foo() == RESULT_SUCCESS) {
                  return 0;
                  }

                  /* error: no match for ‘operator==’
                  if (foo() == false) {
                  return -1;
                  }
                  */
                  }


                  (g++ -Wall -Wextra -pedantic -std=c++11)







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Nov 21 '18 at 20:36

























                  answered Nov 21 '18 at 20:23









                  Mike KinghanMike Kinghan

                  32.1k867117




                  32.1k867117

























                      0














                      Do this change:



                      enum class result {
                      ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
                      ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
                      ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
                      SUCCESS = 0
                      };


                      because your enumerated values are in a scope, you no longer have to give them as long a name.



                      Now your code becomes:



                      if (MyFunc() != result::SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


                      which is a whole 1 character longer than before.



                      You could also



                      using my_status_t = result;


                      if you are tied to my_status_t as a type name.





                      As of C++17 there is no way to cleanly avoid the result:: prefix. There is talk about using ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER; or the like in later versions of C++, but I'm unaware if they are going to get into c++20.






                      share|improve this answer


























                      • What I'm looking for is the ability to avoid the something:: prefix.

                        – Jeremy Friesner
                        Nov 21 '18 at 19:21
















                      0














                      Do this change:



                      enum class result {
                      ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
                      ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
                      ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
                      SUCCESS = 0
                      };


                      because your enumerated values are in a scope, you no longer have to give them as long a name.



                      Now your code becomes:



                      if (MyFunc() != result::SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


                      which is a whole 1 character longer than before.



                      You could also



                      using my_status_t = result;


                      if you are tied to my_status_t as a type name.





                      As of C++17 there is no way to cleanly avoid the result:: prefix. There is talk about using ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER; or the like in later versions of C++, but I'm unaware if they are going to get into c++20.






                      share|improve this answer


























                      • What I'm looking for is the ability to avoid the something:: prefix.

                        – Jeremy Friesner
                        Nov 21 '18 at 19:21














                      0












                      0








                      0







                      Do this change:



                      enum class result {
                      ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
                      ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
                      ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
                      SUCCESS = 0
                      };


                      because your enumerated values are in a scope, you no longer have to give them as long a name.



                      Now your code becomes:



                      if (MyFunc() != result::SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


                      which is a whole 1 character longer than before.



                      You could also



                      using my_status_t = result;


                      if you are tied to my_status_t as a type name.





                      As of C++17 there is no way to cleanly avoid the result:: prefix. There is talk about using ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER; or the like in later versions of C++, but I'm unaware if they are going to get into c++20.






                      share|improve this answer















                      Do this change:



                      enum class result {
                      ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = -3,
                      ERROR_FILE_NOT_FOUND = -2,
                      ERROR_GENERAL = -1,
                      SUCCESS = 0
                      };


                      because your enumerated values are in a scope, you no longer have to give them as long a name.



                      Now your code becomes:



                      if (MyFunc() != result::SUCCESS) printf("Error!n");


                      which is a whole 1 character longer than before.



                      You could also



                      using my_status_t = result;


                      if you are tied to my_status_t as a type name.





                      As of C++17 there is no way to cleanly avoid the result:: prefix. There is talk about using ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = result::ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER; or the like in later versions of C++, but I'm unaware if they are going to get into c++20.







                      share|improve this answer














                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer








                      edited Nov 21 '18 at 19:32

























                      answered Nov 21 '18 at 18:55









                      Yakk - Adam NevraumontYakk - Adam Nevraumont

                      187k20199383




                      187k20199383













                      • What I'm looking for is the ability to avoid the something:: prefix.

                        – Jeremy Friesner
                        Nov 21 '18 at 19:21



















                      • What I'm looking for is the ability to avoid the something:: prefix.

                        – Jeremy Friesner
                        Nov 21 '18 at 19:21

















                      What I'm looking for is the ability to avoid the something:: prefix.

                      – Jeremy Friesner
                      Nov 21 '18 at 19:21





                      What I'm looking for is the ability to avoid the something:: prefix.

                      – Jeremy Friesner
                      Nov 21 '18 at 19:21











                      0














                      Here's a way:



                      enum class my_status_t { };

                      inline constexpr my_status_t RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = my_status_t(-3);
                      // add other enum values here


                      Unfortunately, this way you lose some good properties of enum. Like compiler can warn you if you don't handle a value in a switch (and don't forget to set the underlying type of enum class, if you have big values).



                      So I actually don't recommend this way (I better like Yakk's solution), but maybe this answer can help you anyway...






                      share|improve this answer




























                        0














                        Here's a way:



                        enum class my_status_t { };

                        inline constexpr my_status_t RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = my_status_t(-3);
                        // add other enum values here


                        Unfortunately, this way you lose some good properties of enum. Like compiler can warn you if you don't handle a value in a switch (and don't forget to set the underlying type of enum class, if you have big values).



                        So I actually don't recommend this way (I better like Yakk's solution), but maybe this answer can help you anyway...






                        share|improve this answer


























                          0












                          0








                          0







                          Here's a way:



                          enum class my_status_t { };

                          inline constexpr my_status_t RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = my_status_t(-3);
                          // add other enum values here


                          Unfortunately, this way you lose some good properties of enum. Like compiler can warn you if you don't handle a value in a switch (and don't forget to set the underlying type of enum class, if you have big values).



                          So I actually don't recommend this way (I better like Yakk's solution), but maybe this answer can help you anyway...






                          share|improve this answer













                          Here's a way:



                          enum class my_status_t { };

                          inline constexpr my_status_t RESULT_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETER = my_status_t(-3);
                          // add other enum values here


                          Unfortunately, this way you lose some good properties of enum. Like compiler can warn you if you don't handle a value in a switch (and don't forget to set the underlying type of enum class, if you have big values).



                          So I actually don't recommend this way (I better like Yakk's solution), but maybe this answer can help you anyway...







                          share|improve this answer












                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer










                          answered Nov 21 '18 at 19:58









                          gezageza

                          13.1k32776




                          13.1k32776






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid



                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53415177%2fis-there-a-way-to-specify-an-enum-class-value-without-having-to-type-out-its-sco%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                              }
                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              這個網誌中的熱門文章

                              Hercules Kyvelos

                              Tangent Lines Diagram Along Smooth Curve

                              Yusuf al-Mu'taman ibn Hud