←back to thread

182 points Twirrim | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
harry8 ◴[] No.41874909[source]
Is C++ capable of deprecating or simplifying anything?

Honest question, haven't followed closely. rand() is broken,I;m told unfixable and last I heard still wasn't deprecated.

Is this proposal a test? "Can we even drop support for a solution to a problem literally nobody has?"

replies(6): >>41875009 #>>41875032 #>>41875407 #>>41875528 #>>41875757 #>>41875887 #
Nevermark ◴[] No.41875757[source]
I think you are right. Absolutely.

Don’t break perfection!! Just accumulate more perfection.

What we need is a new C++ symbol that reliably references eight bit bytes, without breaking compatibility, or wasting annnnnny opportunity to expand the kitchen sink once again.

I propose “unsigned byte8” and (2’s complement) “signed byte8”. And “byte8” with undefined sign behavior because we can always use some more spice.

“unsigned decimal byte8” and “signed decimal byte8”, would limit legal values to 0 to 10 and -10 to +10.

For the damn accountants.

“unsigned centimal byte8” and “signed centimal byte8”, would limit legal values to 0 to 100 and -100 to +100.

For the damn accountants who care about the cost of bytes.

Also for a statistically almost valid, good enough for your customer’s alpha, data type for “age” fields in databases.

And “float byte8” obviously.

replies(1): >>41876095 #
1. bastawhiz ◴[] No.41876095[source]
> For the damn accountants who care about the cost of bytes.

Finally! A language that can calculate my S3 bill