Is the world coming to an end?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 14:27:09 -0400, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> wrote:

> "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote in message
> news:inacud$10b$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> Lars T. Kyllingstad:
>>
>>> > I agree that 0b could and should be deprecated.
>>>
>>> Ditto.
>>
>> No please :-)
>>
>
> Yea, I'm perfectly fine with omitting built-in octal literals, but I'll  
> jump
> deep into the "bitch and moan" ship if the deprication-axe gets aimed at
> binary.

I think the idea is that 0b1111_1111 is replaced with binary!1111_1111

Note, someone earlier brought up that hexadecimal cannot really go this  
route because abcd is also a valid symbol name.  Plus hexadecimal is  
infinitely more useful.

BTW, I'd be on Nick's side if we drop 0b syntax, simply because it doesn't  
hurt to have it.  Yeah, it's inconsistent, so what?  Who cares?  We also  
don't have base 3, base 4, base 5, .. literals so why isn't anyone  
complaining about those?  I've used every one of those just as much as  
I've used octal in programming...

-Steve