On Friday, 17 June 2016 at 15:50:41 UTC, Guillaume Boucher wrote:
I was referring to this diff in the pull linked request:
-private size_t _alignUp(size_t alignment)(size_t n)
+private uintptr_t _alignUp(uintptr_t alignment)(uintptr_t n)
size_t is the correct type. There is no reason to change it.
I dislike the conceptually privileged status of "uint" in Walter's
proposal. size_t is generic; uint is not. I like the idea in C++
of the ptrdiff_t type being generic across pointer types. If we
want to have the code be conceptually cleaner, I think a type such
as voidptr_t, which is more obviously intended to represent an
arbitrary pointer, would be a better choice.
