Comments on: Reader Q&A: Why was implicit int removed?

While I think this is a good change which will improve readability without sacrificing to much flexibility, the int type is still special in some circumstances, for example when doing arithmetic ...

https://herbsutter.com/2015/04/16/reader-qa-why-was-implicit-int-removed/#comment-37800

Unnamed parameters are often used to indicate that the parameter is not used in the function. This means the compiler doesn't have an additional identifier that it will flag as unused, and the ne...

https://herbsutter.com/2015/04/16/reader-qa-why-was-implicit-int-removed/#comment-37008

In your ambiguous example, it seems to me an alternative language fix might have been to forbid unnamed parameters in the declaration of a function. After all, I seem to remember reading thirty y...

https://herbsutter.com/2015/04/16/reader-qa-why-was-implicit-int-removed/#comment-36951

Dear Herb Sutter, how I can suggest a question for Reader Q&A. I did not find an email address of you on this page. Thanks!

https://herbsutter.com/2015/04/16/reader-qa-why-was-implicit-int-removed/#comment-36949

Sir am quite clear that why int as a default data type is removed as it can add confusion but why "int" as a default return type is removed is removed ?

https://herbsutter.com/2015/04/16/reader-qa-why-was-implicit-int-removed/#comment-36946

Once Concepts makes it into the standard we can add an "implicit auto" rule. C++ will be that much closer to Perl ;)

https://herbsutter.com/2015/04/16/reader-qa-why-was-implicit-int-removed/#comment-36943

@Motti: Fixed, thanks. But think of the value of implicit "it": seems that having would make easier to write tersely when matters. :)

https://herbsutter.com/2015/04/16/reader-qa-why-was-implicit-int-removed/#comment-36941

Typo alert: > If we had implicit it "for small values of 'n' " ;)

https://herbsutter.com/2015/04/16/reader-qa-why-was-implicit-int-removed/#comment-36939