[dmd-internals] type inconsistency in the source code

[mrmocool at gmx.de]

I've done a little bit of code cleanup, using bool where apprioriate,  
reducing the memory footprint a bit, properly using enums/bitfields for  
flags etc.

Unfortunately there is no consistency in the types used in the code.
It even defines some types like d_uns32 but they are very sparsely used.

Even worse there's
// Be careful not to care about sign when using dinteger_t  <---
typedef uint64_t dinteger_t;
typedef int64_t sinteger_t;
typedef uint64_t uinteger_t;

     virtual dinteger_t toInteger(); <---
     virtual uinteger_t toUInteger();

So there's practically no difference between those functions? What's the  
deal?
Why the inexpressive aliases?

I would personally love to have a set of types that look natural and clear  
like in D, i.e. without some crappy prefix d_ or suffix _t like  
int32,uint32,...
But in the end the point is to get some consistency.
Please comment.