Implicit enum conversions are a stupid PITA

[Don]

Walter Bright wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Regarding base type names I have proposed :
>> byte => sbyte
>> wchar => char16 (or shortchar)
>> dchar => char32 (or intchar)
> 
> 
> Yes, we can endlessly rename keywords, but in the end, what does that 
> accomplish that would compensate for upending every D program in existence?

Removing a frequent bug.
IMHO, wchar and dchar are fine as is. But byte --> sbyte I support. 
'byte' is a really, really awful name.

EVERYONE makes the mistake of thinking 'byte' is unsigned. I still do 
it, really frequently. I believe that almost every existing use of 
'byte' is a bug!

BTW I don't think that "everyone" is much of an exaggeration. For 
example, YOU have done it! (The first version of the htod utility used 
'byte' where it should have been 'ubyte').
And if even you find it unintuitive, I think the entire planet finds it 
unintuitive.