bearophile can say "i told you so" (re uint->int implicit conv)

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 4/2/13 3:49 AM, Don wrote:
> IMHO, array.length is *the* place where unsigned does *not* work. size_t
> should be an integer. We're not supporting 16 bit systems, and the few
> cases where a size_t value can potentially exceed int.max could be
> disallowed.
>
> The problem with unsigned is that it gets used as "positive integer",
> which it is not. I think it was a big mistake that D turned C's
> "unsigned long" into "ulong", thereby making it look more attractive.
> Nobody should be using unsigned types unless they have a really good
> reason. Unfortunately, size_t forces you to use them.

I used to lean a lot more toward this opinion until I got to work on a 
C++ codebase using signed integers as array sizes and indices. It's an 
pain all over the code - two tests instead of one or casts all over, 
more cases to worry about... changing the code to use unsigned 
throughout ended up being an improvement.

Andrei