Integer conversions too pedantic in 64-bit

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 20:58:17 -0500, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> 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.

Hey, bikeshedders, I found this cool easter-egg feature in D!  It's called  
alias!  Don't like the name of something?  Well you can change it!

alias size_t wordsize;

Now, you can use wordsize instead of size_t in your code, and the compiler  
doesn't care! (in fact, that's all size_t is anyways *hint hint*)

;)

-Steve