problem with size_t and an easy solution
Freddy via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sun Dec 7 17:50:44 PST 2014
On Monday, 8 December 2014 at 01:30:35 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Hello.
>
> i don't like `size_t`. for many month i avoied using it
> wherever that
> was possible, 'cause i feel something wrong with it. and today
> i found
> the soultion!
>
> let's see how other D types are named: `int`, `uint`, `byte`
> (oh, well,
> this name sux), `ulong`. see the pattern? so i decided to rename
> `size_t` to `usize`. and you know what? it immidiately started
> to be
> familiar. like a thing that was always here, simply dressed in
> patches.
>
> let's face it: that ugly '_t' is alien to D. this is an ugly
> leftover
> from C, and this leftover is nonsence. it will not really help
> anyone,
> but it immideately turns D code to badly-looking crap. see for
> yourself:
>
> size_t countSomeElements();
>
> and
>
> usize countSomeElements();
>
> `size_t` looking like an alien here, ruining all the style.
>
> i propose to introduce `usize` and `sptrdiff` along with those
> '_t'
> uglyness, and then slowly migrate all the code to the new names.
>
> yes, this is another "cosmetic issue", but let me tell you that
> such
> "purely cosmetic things" are really important for those who just
> starting to learn the language.
>
> it's impossible to write nice D code with `size_t`: we have
> either
> alias it each time or use `uint`/`ulong` to make our code looks
> good.
>
> really, i've seen people who using `uint` instead of `size_t`,
> 'cause
> "with size_t my code looks ugly, and i tired of aliasing that
> shit
> every time". ah, yep, their code sux for 64 bits, but: "i know
> that
> 64-bit size_t is... 64-bit. i'll fix that later, maybe."
>
> uglyness leads to bad code. let's kill `size_t` for good!
>
>
> p.s. some of you may think that i'm trolling. i can assure you
> that
> this post is not trolling, this is just another try to talk
> about
> "purely cosmetic issues" and how they hurts the language,
> especially
> for beginners. when beginner see such "pure cosmetic issue", he
> starting to think that the whole language is a mess: "hey, this
> is such
> easy to fix, but they never bother to... i bet the other parts
> of the
> language are even worse." and you know what? it's enough to
> make such
> mistake two or three times to make people believe that D is a
> "dirty
> and hackish language without clear style". "this is uuuugly" is
> *the*
> *argument*.
I would like if usize wasn't implictly convertable to uint or
ulong
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list