"Jonathan M Davis" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > On Saturday, January 21, 2012 21:54:37 Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> 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. > > Except that we're generally against keeping around alias cruft like that > except temporarily as part of a deprecation path, so that doesn't usually > fly. > Certainly, it means that if you want that to happen, you'd then have to be > able to come up with a name and arguments for it which justified having > two > standard aliases for the same thing. >
How about: "Because the existing ones blow and removing them outright is never gonna happen"? ;)
