I would argue that flexible integers aren't the design mistake; the naming of them is.
There should never have been a type `int` that holds a variable amount of bytes; it should have been the modern aliases like int_least32_t and int_fast32_t that actually communicate the possible size of the value.
TheCoelacanth · · focus · HN ↗
There should never have been a type `int` that holds a variable amount of bytes; it should have been the modern aliases like int_least32_t and int_fast32_t that actually communicate the possible size of the value.