typedefs are useless

[Steven Schveighoffer]

"Kirk McDonald" wrote
>
> You can typedef things other than integral types.

OK, so that is one difference between enum and typedef (I forgot about that, 
because I was so narrowly focused on my problem at hand).

but the same thing can be said for non-integral types:

typedef mytype float;

mytype x = 1.0 // does not work.

This typedef is just as useless as an integral typedef.  The fact that enum 
does not exist for a floating point type does not justify the existance of 
typedef.  You can use alias to make a more useful type, but you then do not 
have the restrictions I am looking for.

I look at a typedef as a useful way to create a derived type from a builtin 
type such that it is implicitly convertable to the base type, but not in 
reverse (similar to deriving from a base class).  However, without the 
ability to specify literals, or even extend the syntax to be able to specify 
them (i.e. some way to make 1mt mean cast(mytype)1), the type is only useful 
as an enumeration, as any mathematical manipulation will require lots of 
casting statements, just like an enum.

-Steve