'int' is enough for 'length' to migrate code from x86 to x64

[flamencofantasy via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 21 November 2014 at 09:43:04 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

> C# doesn't encourage usage of unsigned types and warns that 
> they are not CLS-compliant. You're going against established 
> practices there. And signed types for numbers works wonders in 
> C# without any notable problem and makes reasoning about code 
> easier as you don't have to manually check for unsigned 
> conversion bugs everywhere.
>

I don't want to be CLS compliant! I make very heavy use of unsafe 
code, stackalloc and interop to worry about CLS compliance. 
Actually one of the major reasons I am looking at D for 
production code is so that I don't have to mix and match 
Assembly, C/C++ with C#. I want the best of all worlds in one 
language/runtime :).

Anyways, I believe the discussion is about using unsigned for 
array lengths, not unsigned in general. At this point most people 
seem to express an opinion - including me, and I certainly hope D 
stays as it is when it comes to length of an array. I am not 
convinced in the slightest that signed is the way to go.