[kstrauser]

I see what you mean, but do appreciate the quality of life improvement of such things. In your example, that looks a lot like a native int. It might be something different, but 99.9% of the time it’s going to be an int. I think it’s reasonable to say that unless told otherwise, a thing that looks like an int is an int. Same with `x:=3.14`. That could be a long double, but it’s vastly more likely to be a plain old float. Why not make that the default?

An extra advantage I see is that non-default types stand out. At a glance at the code, `x:=10` is the most common int type. It’s plain, unadorned. It’s the usual, boring thing. Things that are less common stand out: oh, this is unsigned for some reason. Guess I should see why. I like the pattern where unusual things are easier to visually scan for.

But at the end of the day, darn it, compiler, you know very well that I mean 3.14 to be a float. Stop making me say so each time!

[moss2]

I can't remember which language, but there is one where every number is a double and there is no int type.

Is Onyx like that? I don't know. It would take me maybe two minutes to look up. The point is I have to look it up to be certain when that certainty could be part of the language.