Integer conversions too pedantic in 64-bit

[spir]

On 02/15/2011 02:58 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Jonathan M Davis"<jmdavisProg at gmx.com>  wrote in message
> news:mailman.1650.1297733226.4748.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
>> On Monday, February 14, 2011 17:06:43 spir wrote:
>>>
>>> Rename size-t, or rather introduce a meaningful standard alias? (would
>>> vote
>>> for Natural)
>>
>> Why? size_t is what's used in C++. It's well known and what lots of
>> programmers
>> would expect What would you gain by renaming it?
>>
>
> Although I fully realize how much this sounds like making a big deal out of
> nothing, to me, using "size_t" has always felt really clumsy and awkward. I
> think it's partly because of using an underscore in such an otherwise short
> identifier, and partly because I've been aware of size_t for years and still
> don't have the slightest clue WTF that "t" means. Something like "wordsize"
> would make a lot more sense and frankly feel much nicer.
>
> And, of course, there's a lot of well-known things in C++ that D
> deliberately destroys. D is a different language, it may as well do things
> better.

Agreed. While making something different...
About the suffix "-_t", I bet it means type, what do you think? (may well be 
wrong, just because I have here and there seen custom types like name_t or 
point_t or such) Anyone has a history of C/++ at hand?

Denis
-- 
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com