01777777777777777777777 [std.conv.octal]

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On 4/7/22 3:18 PM, kdevel wrote:
> On Thursday, 7 April 2022 at 16:38:58 UTC, Adam Ruppe wrote:
>> On Thursday, 7 April 2022 at 16:28:39 UTC, kdevel wrote:
>>> That was not my objection. My point is that it won't compile for 
>>> certain valid octal literals.
>>
>> They're not actually octal literals.
> 
> You certainly don't want to dispute that
> 
>      01777777777777777777777
> 
> is actually an octal literal whose value fits in a ulong?

but that's not what you gave to the compiler. for 
`octal!1777777777777777777777`, the number part of that expression isn't 
a valid literal that fits in a ulong.

> 
> The method does not work for most of the possible octal literals whose 
> values fit in a ulong. I would call it an inconvenience method.

It works for all numbers below 288,230,376,151,711,744 (i.e. up to 58 bits).

So, yeah, not all of them. But many of them.

But I kind of agree with you that the integer one is full of problems.

Another problem I just realized:

```d
     auto x1 = octal!17777777777;
     auto x2 = octal!"17777777777";
     pragma(msg, typeof(x1)); // long
     pragma(msg, typeof(x2)); // int
```

Why? because `octal(T)` takes the type of `T`

And there's no way to fix it. Because you'd want `octal!1L` to be long, 
so you can't just look at the value.

We might want to just undocument the integer version.

-Steve