Things that may be removed
a at a.a
Wed Dec 24 08:57:21 PST 2008
"Don" <nospam at nospam.com> wrote in message
news:git0p7$2tah$1 at digitalmars.com...
> bearophile wrote:
>> Nick Sabalausky:
>>> Disagree. Octal can often useful on low-level embedded stuff.
>> I think the point was to improve the syntax of octal numbers, not to
>> remove them. So 0125 becomes a syntax error (as usual to keep
>> compatibility with C, otherwise it's better to make it just mean 125),
>> and invent a less error-prone syntax for octal numbers. For example
> Exactly. I just think it's ridiculous that octal has a privileged syntax:
> int a = 06;
> int b = 09;
> either both lines should compile, or neither.
> I like the 0c635 syntax.
Geez! I had no idea prepending a zero made it octal. That's terrible.
More information about the Digitalmars-d