auto, var, raii,scope, banana

[Don Clugston]

Nils Hensel wrote:
> kris schrieb:
>> Don has a good point: changing to "var" would cause conflict with 
>> existing variable-names.
> 
> I'm sorry but I don't believe there are many programmers out there 
> actually using something as undescriptive as "var" as a regular 
> identifier. 

Maybe my first impression of the google search yourself -- the data is 
there.

I also strongly believe that no one should. It's the
> implication of a maintenance nightmare.

> I don't intend to insult Don in any way but it's a horrible practice 
> IMNSHO that should not be preserved.

I don't understand. I can't see the difference between 'var' and 'x'.
Do you also dislike use of 'i' as a counter variable in a for loop?
(And if not, what is the difference?)

> So let's not focus on some odd minority but rather on the wide use of 
> "var" in the context of type inference and dynamic typing.

'var' is inappropriate in a statically typed language. Remember that 
'static's are variables too. Note that 'auto' was one of the original C 
keywords, and was chosen without any constraint (no legacy code 
whatsoever, they could have chosen any name, including 'var'). Every 
variable was classed into either:

static
auto
register

> Also I don't think that it's a good habit to be looking at how C++ does 
> something unless one is looking for a bad example. My main reason for 
> interest in D is because personally I'm fed up with C++ and consider it 
> an abomination and a major PITA.

Agreed, but the 'auto' thing ultimately comes from C, not C++.