On Wed, 16 Feb 2011 09:23:09 -0500, gölgeliyele <usul...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/16/11 9:09 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 16:50:21 -0500, Nick Sabalausky <a@a.a> wrote:
"Nick Sabalausky" <a@a.a> wrote in message
module nick;
alias size_t wordsize;
Now you can use it anywhere, it's sooo freaking simple, I don't
understand the outrage.
But that is somewhat selfish. Given size_t causes dissatisfaction with a
lot of people, people will start create their won aliases and then you
end up having 5 different versions of it around. If this type is an
important one for writing architecture independent code that can take
advantage of architectural limits, then we better don't have 5 different
names for it in common code.
Sir, you've heard from the men who don't like size_t. But what about the
silent masses who do?
So we change it. And then people don't like what it's changed to, for
example, I might like size_t or already have lots of code that uses
size_t. So I alias your new name to size_t in my code. How does this
make things better/different?
bearophile doesn't like writeln. He uses something else in his libs, it's
just an alias. Does that mean we should change writeln?
IT'S A NAME!!! one which many are used to using/knowing. Whatever name it
is, you just learn it, and once you know it, you just use it. If we
hadn't been using it for the last 10 years, I'd say, sure, let's have a
vote and decide on a name. You can't please everyone with every name.
size_t isn't so terrible that it needs to be changed, so can we focus
efforts on actual important things? This is the sheddiest bikeshed
argument I've seen in a while.
I'm done with this thread...
-Steve
