On 02/15/2011 05:50 AM, 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 don't need to change in the sense of replace. We just need a /standard/
correct and meaningful alternative. It must be standard to be "shared wealth"
of the community, thus defined in the core stdlib or whereever (as opposed to
people using their own terms, all different, as I did for a while).
alias size_t GoodTypeName; // always available
Possibly in a while there would be a consensus to get rid of such historic junk
as size_t, but it's a different step, and probably a later phase of the
language's evolution imo. All we nedd now, is to be able to use a good name for
an unsigned type sized to machine word and usable for indices, length, etc.
Maybe the #1 type in real code, by the way, or is it string?
As long as such a name is not defined as standard, it may be counter-productive
for the community, and annoying for others reading our code, to use our own
preferred terms.
Denis
--
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com
