On 02/15/2011 03:11 AM, Don wrote:
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.
That would /also/ solve dark corner issue & bugs. Let us define a standard
alias to be used for indices, length, and such, and take the opportunity to
give it a meaningful name. Then let core and lib functions to expect & return
integer's. But this is a hard path, don't you think?
Denis
--
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com
