On 02/15/2011 02:58 AM, 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.
Agreed. While making something different...
About the suffix "-_t", I bet it means type, what do you think? (may well be
wrong, just because I have here and there seen custom types like name_t or
point_t or such) Anyone has a history of C/++ at hand?
Denis
--
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com
