[prewett]

I'm not sure what you mean by "imprecise types", but if you mean something like using an `int` for an array index instead of `size_t` or something, I can tell you why I do it. Using `int` lets you use -1 as an easy invalid index, and iterating backwards is a straightforward modification of the normal loop: `for (int i = max; i >= 0; --i)`. That loop fails if using `size_t`, since it is never negative. Actually `size_t` may not even be correct for STL containers, it might be `std::vector::size_type` or something. Also, I don't think I've encountered an array with more than 2 billion items. And some things, like movie data, are usually iterated over using pointers. As you say `int` is easy to type.

Also, for something like half my programming life, a 2+GB array was basically unobtainable.

[tehjoker]

By precise, I meant more the byte width (uint32_t vs uint64_t etc). The other kinds of types help you track what the purpose of something is, but don't really assist with correctness at the machine level.

In my work, I have a lot of data that is > 2GB, so int32_t vs uint32_t is very meaningful, and usually using a uint32_t is just delaying upgrading to int64_t or uint64_t.

Going in the other direction, a point cloud can usually be represented using 3 uint16_t and that saves a lot of memory vs using uint32_t or uint64_t.

[wat10000]

If you want an index that can go negative, then the right type is ssize_t, not int.