Octal literals: who uses this?

[Sean Kelly]

Christopher Wright wrote:
> I've been looking at dil and lexing D. Lexing character literals and 
> string literals is not quite so easy as I thought it would be, but 
> overall not difficult either.
> 
> One thing I'm curious about:
> There are three forms of hex literals:
> \x: 2 digits
> \u: 4 digits
> \U: 8 digits
> 
> There is one form of octal literal:
> \: 1 to 3 digits
> 
> Why? With hex literals, each option is a fixed width. That is sensible.
> 
> Octal literals aren't necessary with hex literals, but they might be 
> convenient. However, making them variable width seems like it opens up 
> the possibility for obscure bugs. I would not recommend that anyone use 
> octal literals, and I don't think they're an advantage to the language. 
> Even if they were, their current representation is not.
> 
> Can we just remove this?

All the escaped literals are going away, I believe.