Re: (fully qualified) names of basic types

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 4:43 PM, Kevin Reid <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.

My mistake.


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

Because of my above mistake.


-- 
Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain

    Cheers,
    --MarkM