Signed-unsigned comparisons in Phobos

[Don]

kennytm wrote:
> Don <nospam at nospam.com> wrote:
> 
>> I've had a look at a dozen or so of these, and they were all real. I
>> didn't see any which require a cast to "make the compiler shut up".
>> That's pretty impressive. In C++ I find that such messages are nearly
>> always false positives.
>>
>> The one case where it's a bit annoying is this:
>>
>> int [] x = new int[6]; // or x = some array literal.
>> for (int i = 0; i < x.length; ++i) {...}
>>
>> Here is a suggestion for how we could eliminate such false positives.
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6478
> 
> Doesn't this require flow analysis? 
Yes. See the bug report.

> And the type of index 'i' should be 'size_t' anyway.

Why? It will only ever be in the range 0..6.