Get rid of bit and bit[] ?

[Derek Parnell]

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:10:23 +1100, Walter Bright  
<newshound at digitalmars.com> wrote:

>
> "Derek Parnell" <derek at psych.ward> wrote in message
> news:op.s46t2hmc6b8z09 at ginger.vic.bigpond.net.au...
>> On Sun, 19 Feb 2006 07:39:18 +1100, Walter Bright
>> <newshound at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Anders F Björklund" <afb at algonet.se> wrote in message
>>> news:dt75m2$243m$2 at digitaldaemon.com...
>>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>> I was thinking of making bool a keyword and basic type along the  
>>>>> lines
>>>>> of
>>>>> bool in C++.
>>>> I thought not having a boolean type was part of D's "personality".
>>>
>>> Boolean was redundant to the bit type.
>>
>> Wrong! That statement implies that the entire requirements of a correct
>> 'boolean' type is met by the behaviour of the 'bit' type. And that is
>> demonstrably incorrect.
>
> It did nearly every item on your list. Adding another basic type that
> overlapped 98% with another basic type is just not a good idea. But  
> absent
> that other type, then it does become a good idea.

I note my "entire" and your "nearly" <g>. But thank you, Walter. What  
didn't you deem worthy?

By the way, is there anything else I can 'specify' for you?


-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia