Why typedef's shouldn't have been removed :(

[Matt Peterson]

On Saturday, 5 May 2012 at 23:41:52 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
> That's *such* a lame question...
>
> Even if I _couldn't_ tell you a reason, that'd still be a lame
> question, because the *entire point* of reflection is to access
> type information information about the program... if for nothing
> other than printing it out for the user.
>
> But it's more than that: it's the same darn reason why you need
> to distinguish between
> void* and HWND -- it's an ERROR!
>
> In other words, this must NOT compile!
>
> auto call(F, T...)(F func, T args) { return func(args); }
> void test(uint) { }
> void main() { call!(typeof(&test), size_t)(&test, 1); }
>
> If you're still asking "why shouldn't it compile" then you 
> should
> look up what "type safety" means.
>

That doesn't compile on x86_64.

The point of size_t is to be the native word-sized integer for
the platform, and it does exactly that.