I'm looking at the general picture. Eventually every term in D could be changed to an alias.  I know changing one thing won't make much of a differnce, but then where do you stop. Pretty soon you've change every term in the language, or doubled the language size. I say, there's nothing wrong with the term float.

"Chris" <cl@nopressedmeat.tinfoilhat.ca> wrote in message news:3D93F5F6.8020104@nopressedmeat.tinfoilhat.ca...
> anderson wrote:
> >>- No C programmer has to look up anything if float/double/extended are properly aliased in D, they will be happy campers
> >
> >
> > Unless there reading some else code.
>
> But these people are programmers.  How hard is it going to be to remember that real is float?  There's a pretty good chance that you already know, providing that you took math in highschool, or are using floating point in the first place.
>
> Chris
>

The logical fallacy in this argument is that because we give ourselves permission to change one thing, we give ourselves permission to change everything, and therefore we should change nothing.  On that argument we should all revert to C.

Int16, Int32, Real32, Real64 terminology actually clarifies types that are intentionally ambiguous in the C standard (ints, extendeds).  These terms also clear up semantic inconsistencies (see earlier posts about nouns and adjectives).  This combination is a great help to students, and utterly trivial for experienced C folks.

I have a hard time picturing any C programmer scratching his head over Real32 or even complaining about it.  FORTRAN folks would be very happy with it. Cross-platform programmers would be ecstatic.

Mark


In article <an1ghq$c1v$1@digitaldaemon.com>, anderson says...
>
>I'm looking at the general picture. Eventually every term in D could be changed to an alias.  I know changing one thing won't make much of a differnce, but then where do you stop. Pretty soon you've change every term in the language, or doubled the language size. I say, there's nothing wrong with the term float.
>