Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:

> I also know seasoned programmers who had no idea that -u compiles and that it also oddly returns an unsigned type.
>
1) I see no danger here.
2) I doubt this proposal solves the danger, wheatever it is.
3) -u is funny and looks like wrong desing to me.
4) Did you want C# checked computations?

Kagamin wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
> 
>> I also know seasoned programmers who had no idea that -u compiles and that it also oddly returns an unsigned type.
>>
> 1) I see no danger here.
> 2) I doubt this proposal solves the danger, wheatever it is.
> 3) -u is funny and looks like wrong desing to me.
> 4) Did you want C# checked computations?

I didn't want runtime checks inserted, just to tighten compilation rules.

Andrei

Andrei Alexandrescu:
> I didn't want runtime checks inserted, just to tighten compilation rules.

The compiler may use both :-)

Bye,
bearophile