dmd 1.046 and 2.031 releases

[Denis Koroskin]

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 14:13:45 +0400, Walter Bright  
<newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote:

> Derek Parnell wrote:
>> On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:11:26 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>>> Derek Parnell wrote:
>>>> I'm struggling to see why the compiler cannot just disallow any
>>>> signed<->unsigned implicit conversion? Is it a matter of backward
>>>> compatibility again?
>>> What's the signed-ness of 5?
>>  Positive. A positive number can be assigned to an 'int' if there is no  
>> size
>> issue.
>
> It can also be an unsigned.
>
>> What's the problem that I'm obviously missing?
>>
>>> When you index a pointer, is the index signed or unsigned?
>>  An index can be either. What's the problem here?
>
> auto x = p1 - p2;
>
> What's the type of x?

ptrdiff_t, signed counterpart of size_t