<div dir="ltr">On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 9:51 AM William Dillon <<a href="mailto:william@housedillon.com">william@housedillon.com</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">The vast majority of special cases I’ve seen and written are due to the size of Int, not a pointer per se. To clear up the confusion, how about we rename bitwidth to intwidth or intsize?<br>
<br>
- Will<br>
<br>
> On Mar 15, 2016, at 9:40 AM, Shawn Erickson via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> I guess the fuzziness in my mind is when considering LP64, LLP64, etc. I believe swift attempts to avoid that by defining either 32 bit or 64 bit model. If that is universally the case then I think bitwidth is fine. If not then pointerwidth may be more correct. Those bridging to C would have to consider information from the C world to deal with the variations of type size based on platform and 32/64.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I am curious to see some examples of checking Int size to better understand the situation.</div><div><br></div><div>-Shawn</div><div> </div></div></div>