I vote for "huge"  ;)

byte
short
int
long
huge
gargantuan
reallyreallyreallybigint

Sean


"Pavel Minayev" <evilone@omen.ru> wrote in message news:a04779$1i7j$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:a0432a$1es4$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> > If D is ported to a platform where longer than 64 bit ints make sense, I
> see
> > no problem with defining a new basic type for it. I don't like the C
usage
> > of multiple keywords for a type. It'd probably be called "longlong".
>
> Hmmm... longint?
>
> > For those who want exact type sizes, perhaps a standard module can be defined with aliases like int8, int16, etc.
>
> Great idea!

"Sean L. Palmer" <spalmer@iname.com> wrote in message news:a0jeoa$11dv$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> I vote for "huge"  ;)
>
> byte
> short
> int
> long
> huge
> gargantuan
> reallyreallyreallybigint
>
> Sean

Ack!

(You forgot "titanic", by the way!)