Re: (fully qualified) names of basic types

On Mar 19, 2009, at 19:02, Mark Miller wrote:

> E used to use "integer" for exactly this reason. But no one liked
> that, and the switch to "int", despite the huge differences from the C
> int, seemed to please everyone at the time.

Clarification: I'm talking about the FQNs/import names, not the names  
of the guards in the safe scope, which can stay the same.

> For characters, I think we
> should stick with "char" regardless.


Why?

-- 
Kevin Reid                            <http://homepage.mac.com/kpreid/>