Is the world coming to an end?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 22:14:47 -0400, Daniel Gibson <metalcaedes at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> Am 03.04.2011 04:00, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:
>> On 4/2/11 6:36 PM, Daniel Gibson wrote:
>>> 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 :)
>>
>> Some discussions on IRC suggest otherwise.
>>
>> Andrei
>
> Ok. I don't hang out in the D IRC chan because the NG is time-consuming  
> enough
> already ;)

Oh how true this is :)

-Steve