Integer conversions too pedantic in 64-bit

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Monday, February 14, 2011 15:22:38 dsimcha wrote:
> Now that DMD has a 64-bit beta available, I'm working on getting a whole
> bunch of code to compile in 64 mode.  Frankly, the compiler is way too
> freakin' pedantic when it comes to implicit conversions (or lack thereof)
> of array.length.  99.999% of the time it's safe to assume an array is not
> going to be over 4 billion elements long.  I'd rather have a bug the
> 0.001% of the time than deal with the pedantic errors the rest of the
> time, because I think it would be less total time and effort invested.  To
> force me to either put casts in my code everywhere or change my entire
> codebase to use wider integers (with ripple effects just about everywhere)
> strikes me as purity winning out over practicality.

I would have thought that you'd be using size_t when dealing with arrays, since 
that's what their length and indexing type is.

- Jonathan M Davis