[Issue 5063] Stronger typedef for size_t

d-bugmail at puremagic.com d-bugmail at puremagic.com
Sun Sep 6 22:11:00 UTC 2020


Mathias LANG <pro.mathias.lang at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |pro.mathias.lang at gmail.com
         Resolution|---                         |WONTFIX

--- Comment #7 from Mathias LANG <pro.mathias.lang at gmail.com> ---
I'm going to re-close this. Walter has opposed this already and so am I.
Any "solution" would likely trigger a cascade of false positives, which is a
pretty good indication that the problem is not actually being addressed.

We can't magically make people write portable code. There will always be false
negatives, if only for the fact system bindings will be different (and might
not use `size_t`). And we don't even want to: Why should we force a person
coding only for his hobby project to write code that is portable to an
architecture one does not care about ?

Sure, integer conversions need improvements, but having a strongly typed
`size_t` (especially given we removed `typedef`) is not the way.


More information about the Digitalmars-d-bugs mailing list