Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1650.1297733226.4748.digitalmar...@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.

To my mind, a bigger problem is that size_t is WRONG. It should be an integer. NOT unsigned.

Reply via email to