Dan Eble <[email protected]> writes: > On Jan 24, 2020, at 03:49, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[email protected]> wrote: >> The alternative is that we don't cast it, but pass on the 64 bit >> size_t, but every time we do that, we'll create new call sites where >> we have to fix up conversions, so that will create more work for >> ourselves, > > I've been trickling in changes of this nature for a few months, and > I'm content to keep it up if we can agree that it's the right thing to > do.
Personally I think it's not as much "the right" as a good thing to do. We have stuff like the "Rational" type exploding for certain denominators that the "new complexity" composers love to be dealing with, and removing size mismatches at least lets them explode at a time when their actual capacity rather than a fraction of it gets exhausted. -- David Kastrup
