On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 19:23:48 +0200 "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 02, 2012 19:10:53 monarch_dodra wrote: > > Ideally, only size_t would be allowed. Reality makes it so that we > need ulong in some cases (e.g. iota). Given that fact, you'd ideally > restrict it to size_t or ulong specfically (or at least > IndexType.sizeof >= size_t.sizeof). The problem is that I'm quite > sure that there are plenty of programmers out there who have been > using int for length and indices even though it's a horribly bad > idea. It's a classic mistake. > Yea, typing "int" tends to be automatic enough, and then the awkwardness of "size_t" on top of that tends to ensure it doesn't get used as much as it should.