64 bit size_t

[evilrat]

On Monday, 17 February 2014 at 07:15:20 UTC, Steve Teale wrote:
> Why is it that with 32 bit compilation, int is 32 bits, but
> apparently this convention is not followed in 64 bit 
> compilation.
>
> I have not installed the 64 bit compiler yet, but apparently
>
> int len = parent.children.length+1;
>
> provokes the following error
>
>> acomp.d(782): Error: cannot implicitly convert expression 
>> (parent.children.length + 1LU) of type ulong to int
>
> parent is just a straightforward array
>
> What is size_t for 64 bit?
>
> Steve

it is equal to machine word size. 4 bytes on x86, 8 on x64.

but it looks like length is not size_t but ulong in which case 
you need explicit cast from larget to smaller type. check lenght 
signature