Octal literals: who uses this?

[Walter Bright]

Don wrote:
> and what the heck does "\000000\000000000\000\0000" mean?

It doesn't matter, because if you're translating C code to D, the code 
is probably correct even if you don't know what it means.

> I doubt there is much extant C code which uses octal. Automated 
> translations of octal literals can be done accurately, and you're even 
> supplying the 'htod' converter!

htod is not intended for creating implementation source code. It's just 
for headers. I expect most C translations will be done by hand.


> Note that C# doesn't have octal literals, but does include \0. So 
> there's a precedent for dropping them. This also means that right now, 
> converting code from C# to D can also introduce obscure bugs. I'd argue 
> that that's a scenario that is at least as likely as bugs from C.

It is a good point, but I don't see people translating C# to D. But I do 
see translating C to D (I do it myself!).

> I think the argument for octal is very, very weak.

The issue is really the cost of it being in vs the benefit of pulling it 
out. I see very little cost of leaving it in, so it doesn't need much 
benefit to make it worthwhile.