您可以尝试并定义以下宏:

#define for_range(_type, _param, _A1, _B1) for (bool _ok = true; _ok;)\
for (_type _start = _A1, _finish = _B1; _ok;)\
    for (int _step = 2*(((int)_finish)>(int)_start)-1;_ok;)\
         for (_type _param = _start; _ok ; \
 (_param != _finish ? \
           _param = static_cast<_type>(((int)_param)+_step) : _ok = false))

现在你可以使用它:

enum Count { zero, one, two, three }; 

    for_range (Count, c, zero, three)
    {
        cout << "forward: " << c << endl;
    }

它可以用来在无符号、整数、枚举和字符之间来回迭代:

for_range (unsigned, i, 10,0)
{
    cout << "backwards i: " << i << endl;
}


for_range (char, c, 'z','a')
{
    cout << c << endl;
}

尽管它的定义很尴尬，但它优化得很好。我看了一下vc++中的反汇编程序。 代码非常高效。不要推迟，但是三个for语句:编译器在优化后只会产生一个循环!你甚至可以定义封闭的循环:

unsigned p[4][5];

for_range (Count, i, zero,three)
    for_range(unsigned int, j, 4, 0)
    {   
        p[i][j] = static_cast<unsigned>(i)+j;
    }

显然，不能在有间隙的枚举类型中进行迭代。

将变量强制转换为int&类型可以在保持类型可读的同时进行递增。

#include <iostream>

enum MyEnum
{
    ONE,
    TWO,
    THREE,
    FOUR,
};

int main()
{
    for (MyEnum v = MyEnum::ONE; v <= MyEnum::FOUR; ++(int&)v)
    {
        std::cout<<v<<std::endl;
    }

    return 0;
}

0
1
2
3

下面是另一种只适用于连续枚举的解决方案。它给出了期望的迭代，除了增量中的丑陋，这是它的归属，因为这是c++中破坏的地方。

enum Bar {
    One = 1,
    Two,
    Three,
    End_Bar // Marker for end of enum; 
};

for (Bar foo = One; foo < End_Bar; foo = Bar(foo + 1))
{
    // ...
}

这些解决方案太复杂了，我喜欢这样:

enum NodePosition { Primary = 0, Secondary = 1, Tertiary = 2, Quaternary = 3};

const NodePosition NodePositionVector[] = { Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, Quaternary };

for (NodePosition pos : NodePositionVector) {
...
}

在c++11中，实际上有一个替代方案:编写一个模板化的自定义迭代器。

让我们假设枚举是

enum class foo {
  one,
  two,
  three
};

这段泛型代码将会非常有效地达到目的——放置在泛型头文件中，它将为你提供任何你可能需要迭代的枚举:

#include <type_traits>
template < typename C, C beginVal, C endVal>
class Iterator {
  typedef typename std::underlying_type<C>::type val_t;
  int val;
public:
  Iterator(const C & f) : val(static_cast<val_t>(f)) {}
  Iterator() : val(static_cast<val_t>(beginVal)) {}
  Iterator operator++() {
    ++val;
    return *this;
  }
  C operator*() { return static_cast<C>(val); }
  Iterator begin() { return *this; } //default ctor is good
  Iterator end() {
      static const Iterator endIter=++Iterator(endVal); // cache it
      return endIter;
  }
  bool operator!=(const Iterator& i) { return val != i.val; }
};

你需要专门化它

typedef Iterator<foo, foo::one, foo::three> fooIterator;

然后你可以使用range-for进行迭代

for (foo i : fooIterator() ) { //notice the parentheses!
   do_stuff(i);
}

枚举中没有空白的假设仍然成立;没有假设实际需要多少位来存储枚举值(感谢std::underlying_type)

enum class A {
    a0=0, a3=3, a4=4
};
constexpr std::array<A, 3> ALL_A {A::a0, A::a3, A::a4}; // constexpr is important here

for(A a: ALL_A) {
  if(a==A::a0 || a==A::a4) std::cout << static_cast<int>(a);
}

constexpr std::array甚至可以迭代非顺序的枚举，而无需编译器实例化数组。这取决于编译器的优化启发式以及是否取数组的地址。

In my experiments, I found that g++ 9.1 with -O3 will optimize away the above array if there are 2 non-sequential values or quite a few sequential values (I tested up to 6). But it only does this if you have an if statement. (I tried a statement that compared an integer value greater than all the elements in a sequential array and it inlined the iteration despite none being excluded, but when I left out the if statement, the values were put in memory.) It also inlined 5 values from a non-sequential enum in [one case|https://godbolt.org/z/XuGtoc]. I suspect this odd behavior is due to deep heuristics having to do with caches and branch prediction.

这里有一个godbolt的简单测试迭代的链接，演示了数组并不总是被实例化。

这种技术的代价是写入enum元素两次，并保持两个列表同步。