Is the world coming to an end?

[Daniel Gibson]

Am 03.04.2011 01:20, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:
> On 4/2/11 5:27 PM, ulrik.mikaelsson at gmail.com wrote:
>> A D-newbie would probably be able to guess 0o for octal, but hardly
>> octal!. octal! breaks the rule of least surprise.
> 
> I fail to infer how using the word "octal" for an octal literal is surprising at
> all.
> 
> This thread is a good example that it's impossible to please everyone. Although
> past discussions made it clear that most everyone found leading 0 a poor
> convention for octal numbers, now not only the consensus is weaker, but some
> actually claim a different solution is superior. If that were chosen, then all
> of a sudden octal!777 would have become suddenly sexy and so on.
> 
> The grass is always greener on the other side...
> 
> 
> Andrei

I don't think the consensus that a leading 0 is a poor convention for octal
numbers is weaker now - so far nobody wants the old syntax back :)