unsigned policy

[Sean Kelly]

Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) wrote:
> 
> Current D botches quite a few of the arithmetic conversions. Basically 
> all conversions that may lose value, meaning, or precision should not be 
> allowed implicitly.

Exactly.

 > Walter is willing to fix D in accordance to that
> rule, which would yield an implicit conversion graph as shown in:
> 
> http://erdani.org/d-implicit-conversions.pdf
> 
> Notice that there is no arrow e.g. between int and uint (loss of 
> meaning), or between int and float (loss of precision). But there is an 
> arrow from int and uint to double, because double is able to represent 
> them faithfully.
> 
> If we are nice, we may convince Walter to implement that soon (maybe in 
> 1.006?) but it must be understood that the tighter rules will prompt 
> changes in existing code.

That's fine with me.  Many of us have been asking for this for quite a 
while.


Sean