6
\$\begingroup\$

I feel that the tag is not a very good tag for a few reasons:

  1. It's too broad. Just a quick scan of the questions which use it show languages as varied as C++, Java, C#, SQL, Python, etc.

  2. It has 0 followers, which indicates it's either not useful, or not interesting enough to follow.

I think should be burned.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ Casting and converting are different things. When you (type-)cast, the object still remains the same, you just treat it as a different type. With that said, I also don't see any reason for this tag. \$\endgroup\$
    – Simon Forsberg
    Jan 21 '16 at 14:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SimonForsberg Okay I rephrased my question to reflect this \$\endgroup\$
    – Phrancis
    Jan 21 '16 at 15:01
6
\$\begingroup\$

I'm not so sure. Neither of those two reasons is a solid justification for eliminating a tag.

Applicability to multiple languages is a poor criterion. By that logic, we should eliminate .

has 0 followers. has just one follower. I consider both of them to be useful categories.

Furthermore, there are questions about code whose primary purpose is casting. For example: A less verbose const_cast

So, while we may want to re-evaluate how the tag is applied, I would hesitate to just blast it away.

\$\endgroup\$
1

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .