"Jonathan M Davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > >size_t comes from C/C++, and is exactly the same as it is in C++. In D, you >know that if a type ends in _t, then its size can vary depending on the >machine that you compile on, unlike all of the other primitive types. > >Maybe another name would have been better, but it works, and I think that >most >people who have been C/C++ programmers just don't care. The know size_t, >and >it works. > >At this point, given how much code would break from changing it, you would >have to demonstrate that whatever name you came up with was really worth >that >cost, I realyl don't think that that's going to happen. >
It wouldn't have to change, just have a better name added. No reason 'size_t', et al, couldn't still be kept for compatibility.
