# Policy script enums (and event engine interaction) **URL:** \ **Category:** Development\ **Tags:** development\ **Created:** [December 8, 2010, 2:31am UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/policy-script-enums-and-event-engine-interaction/1748 "2010-12-08T02:31:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Gregor\_Maier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/94ad74/32.png) [@Gregor\_Maier](https://community.zeek.org/u/Gregor_Maier)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2010, 2:31am UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/policy-script-enums-and-event-engine-interaction/1748/1 "2010-12-08T02:31:19Z")
Hi, another question: it seems that I can't specify the value that my enums should have, i.e., I can't do a   enum { foo = 2, bar = 3 } So, it seems that I'll have to use global const to simulate the behavior. But the nice feature of enums is that if I print them with %s, I get their name instead of their value. Is there any way to simulate this (without using a table to map values-\>names?) Looking a bit more at the event engine, it seems that there's no case in which an enum is passed from the event engine to the policy layer as part of an event. It also seems that there's no way to coerce an integer into an enum, right (neither policy layer nor event engine). I'm wondering whether there was a reason for not implementing that (e.g., would break something, enums should be policy layer only). If not, I guess my question is whether it would make sense to add it (at some stage) as I think it would make handling of binary protocols easier. (There seems to be one case (transport\_proto) were there's interaction in bro.bif, but it requires a lot of glue functions). cu gregor ---
**Author:** ![Gregor\_Maier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/94ad74/32.png) [@Gregor\_Maier](https://community.zeek.org/u/Gregor_Maier)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2010, 6:26am UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/policy-script-enums-and-event-engine-interaction/1748/2 "2010-12-08T06:26:29Z")
Hmm, I partially found the solution. Adding an enum in const.bif seem to do the trick for using one enum definition in both the policy layer and the event engine. Also found how to coerce integer into EnumVal in the event engine (but still don't know how to achieve this in the policy layer). Enums with pre-assigned values still don't work though ☹ cu Gregor ---
**Author:** ![Gregor\_Maier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/94ad74/32.png) [@Gregor\_Maier](https://community.zeek.org/u/Gregor_Maier)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2010, 7:54am UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/policy-script-enums-and-event-engine-interaction/1748/3 "2010-12-08T07:54:53Z")
I think I'll actually add this to the bif-language and the bro-policy-lanague, so that one can indeed specify     enum { ASDF=4, FOO=7, BAR=0, } in .bro and .bif files. .... unless somebody thinks this is a bad idea. cu Gregor ---
**Author:** ![Vern](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/community.zeek.org/vern/32/630_2.png) [@Vern](https://community.zeek.org/u/Vern)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2010, 9:37pm UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/policy-script-enums-and-event-engine-interaction/1748/4 "2010-12-08T21:37:03Z")
> .... unless somebody thinks this is a bad idea. For completeness, Gregor & I just discussed this and the plan is to go ahead with adding this feature at some point. (Note, the support won't include enum\<-\>int conversion.)     Vern ---
**Author:** ![robin](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/community.zeek.org/robin/32/599_2.png) [@robin](https://community.zeek.org/u/robin)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2010, 10:58am UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/policy-script-enums-and-event-engine-interaction/1748/5 "2010-12-09T10:58:36Z")
Can you guys elaborate on this? I would think we dont' want implicit conversions, but some form of explicit cast would be nice to have both ways. Robin ---
**Author:** ![Vern](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/user_avatar/community.zeek.org/vern/32/630_2.png) [@Vern](https://community.zeek.org/u/Vern)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2010, 5:25pm UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/policy-script-enums-and-event-engine-interaction/1748/6 "2010-12-09T17:25:17Z")
> \> (Note, the support won't > \> include enum\<-\>int conversion.) > > Can you guys elaborate on this? I would think we dont' want implicit > conversions, but some form of explicit cast would be nice to have > both ways. I resist adding language features/flexibility without clear use cases. Casting enum\<-\>int weakens type safety, so there should be a clear need to have it anyway. So far, we don't have that. If we do, then we can revisit it to determine whether general explicit coercion is indeed the best way to support the need.     Vern ---
**Author:** ![system](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex011/uploads/zeek/original/1X/f09d732bc2cc7c7cc7e35db67cf4e1d5233ce7a7.png) [@system](https://community.zeek.org/u/system)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2022, 3:39pm UTC](https://community.zeek.org/t/policy-script-enums-and-event-engine-interaction/1748/7 "2022-05-06T15:39:19Z")
Closed on May 6, 2022, 3:39pm UTC