Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
The question is then do you want to be more consistent with the
language (abolish size_t and make something nicer), or be consistent
with the known standards (C99 ISO, et all.).
I'd vote for a change, but I know it will never happen (even though it
just might not be too late if we're not coding for 64 bits yet). It's
hardcoded in the skin of C++ programmers, and Walter is at least one
of them.
We also don't go around renaming should to shud, or use dvorak keyboards.
Having to constantly explain that "use 'ourfancyname' instead of size_t, it
works exactly the same as size_t" is a waste of our time and potential users' time.
