http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5063


Walter Bright <bugzi...@digitalmars.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |bugzi...@digitalmars.com
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX


--- Comment #1 from Walter Bright <bugzi...@digitalmars.com> 2010-10-25 
01:08:31 PDT ---
Code that compiles on 32 bits but fails to compile on 64 bits with an
appropriate message is not much of a problem. Making size_t its own type rather
than an alias brings along a whole host of other problems.

Besides, it is perfectly legitimate to use an int to index an array on 64 bits.

Also, it is D best practice to rewrite:

    int i = array.length;

as:

    auto i = array.length;

unless one *specifically* requires an int.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to