isize_t?

[Walter Bright]

On 1/21/2012 7:03 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Saturday, January 21, 2012 21:54:37 Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> It wouldn't have to change, just have a better name added. No reason
>> 'size_t', et al, couldn't still be kept for compatibility.
>
> Except that we're generally against keeping around alias cruft like that
> except temporarily as part of a deprecation path, so that doesn't usually fly.
> Certainly, it means that if you want that to happen, you'd then have to be
> able to come up with a name and arguments for it which justified having two
> standard aliases for the same thing.

I agree with Jonathan. Two names for the same thing just blows.