Complete floating point literals

[Timon Gehr]

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote in message
> news:iva982$dm8$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> This comes from a small sub-thread in D.learn (but I have asked for it the
>> first time in bug 3837 time ago):
>>
http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.learn&article_id=28030
>>
>> I suggest to turn floating point literals like the following into syntax
>> errors (maybe just deprecated, so they get accepted using the -d compiler
>> switch), because the saving of one digit is not worth the small troubles
>> they cause now and then:
>>
>> .5
>> 3.
>>
>> And require to write them like this:
>>
>> 0.5
>> 3.0
>>
>> The enhancement request:
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6277
>>
>> (Daniel Murphy suggests to allow 1.f and 1.L (and maybe .2f and .2L too)
>> but I think this is a special case).
>>
>> (I think disallowing 3. is also useful if you want to allow the
>> introduction of the .. or ... interval syntax. The trailing FP dot causes
>> some troubles and asks for an extra space).
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> If I see enough people against this idea I will probably close the
>> enhancement request.
>>
>
> I see zero benefit to the 1., .1 feature and it's been a problem in syntax
> discussions in the past. I'm completely in favor of ditching it, and have
> already put in a bugzilla vote for bearophile's enhancement request.

+1. Another benefit of ditching it is neater UFCS (if it ever gets implemented):

4.foo(bar);

Cheers,
-Timon