From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 13:15:56 +1100 Message-ID: From: Bruce Ellis To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec5040838187c0b04cf0c0ce1 Subject: Re: [9fans] go forth and ulong no more! Topicbox-Message-UUID: dd898254-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 --bcaec5040838187c0b04cf0c0ce1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 uintptr for size_t. brucee On Nov 22, 2012 1:10 PM, "Dan Cross" wrote: > I agree with brucee here about the Go type names: I'd rather see uint64, > int64, uint32, int32, etc. > > usize doesn't bother me much. New C programmers are often confused by > size_t being unsigned (even experienced ones at times); this makes it clear. > > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Bruce Ellis wrote: > >> i think that go's scalar types would work better. also usize is a bit >> dicky. >> >> brucee >> On Nov 22, 2012 12:23 PM, "erik quanstrom" wrote: >> >>> On Wed Nov 21 19:19:21 EST 2012, benavento@gmail.com wrote: >>> > hola, >>> > >>> > usize, really? >>> > >>> > any reason not use this opportunity to join the world and use >>> inttypes.h or stdint.h format? >>> >>> have you read the opengroup pubs? >>> >>> >>> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/basedefs/stdint.h.html >>> >>> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009604599/basedefs/inttypes.h.html >>> >>> i don't see any advantage to using whatever types these guys are using. >>> when porting things from plan 9, it's good to have different type names. >>> the assumptions of various systems differ. when porting things to plan >>> 9, >>> you're likely going to be using ape anyway. >>> >>> these headers are missing a type representing physical memory, and Rune. >>> no, i'm never going to consider using wchar_t instead. >>> >>> yet they have types we do not want such as int_{least,fast} and >>> int_max_t. >>> they seem to be a trap set by greybeards for unsuspecting young >>> programmers. >>> one could hold this kind of thing up as a reason that c is an old and >>> broken language. >>> >>> and then there's the printf macros. oh, joy. >>> >>> i'm sure that others could back this up with more inteligent reasoning. >>> i'm just >>> prone to rant (had you noticed) when i see some of this stuff. >>> >>> - erik >>> >>> > --bcaec5040838187c0b04cf0c0ce1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

uintptr for size_t.

brucee

On Nov 22, 2012 1:10 PM, "Dan Cross" &= lt;crossd@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree with brucee here about the Go type names: I'd rather see uint64= , int64, uint32, int32, etc.

usize doesn't bother me= much. =C2=A0New C programmers are often confused by size_t being unsigned = (even experienced ones at times); this makes it clear.


On Wed, Nov 2= 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Bruce Ellis <bruce.ellis@gmail.com> = wrote:

i think that go's scalar types would = work better. also usize is=C2=A0 a bit dicky.

brucee

On Nov 22, 2012 12:23 PM, "erik quanstrom&q= uot; <quanstr= o@quanstro.net> wrote:
On Wed Nov 21 19:19:21 EST 2012, benavento@gmail.com wrote:
> hola,
>
> usize, really?
>
> any reason not use this opportunity to join the world and use inttypes= .h or stdint.h format?

have you read the opengroup pubs?

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 http://pubs.opengroup.= org/onlinepubs/007904975/basedefs/stdint.h.html
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 http://pubs.opengrou= p.org/onlinepubs/009604599/basedefs/inttypes.h.html

i don't see any advantage to using whatever types these guys are using.=
when porting things from plan 9, it's good to have different type names= .
the assumptions of various systems differ. =C2=A0when porting things to pla= n 9,
you're likely going to be using ape anyway.

these headers are missing a type representing physical memory, and Rune. no, i'm never going to consider using wchar_t instead.

yet they have types we do not want such as int_{least,fast} and int_max_t.<= br> they seem to be a trap set by greybeards for unsuspecting young programmers= .
one could hold this kind of thing up as a reason that c is an old and broke= n language.

and then there's the printf macros. =C2=A0oh, joy.

i'm sure that others could back this up with more inteligent reasoning.= =C2=A0i'm just
prone to rant (had you noticed) when i see some of this stuff.

- erik


--bcaec5040838187c0b04cf0c0ce1--