Number literals (Was: Re: Case Range Statement ..)

[Leandro Lucarella]

Jarrett Billingsley, el  7 de julio a las 22:28 me escribiste:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 8:08 PM, bearophile<bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote:
> > Nick Sabalausky:
> >> why in the world is anyone defending the continued existance of "5."
> >> and ".5"?<
> >
> > I'm for disallowing them; 5.0 ad 0.5 are better.
> > Anyone else pro/against this idea?
> 
> Totally agree.  They're cruft that just complicate lexical analysis.

Me Too! (TM)

> > Regarding number literals, I'm also for:
> > B) turning the current octal syntax into a syntax error and
> > introducing a safer octal syntax (see Python 3);
> 
> Or just drop octal altogether.  Outside of chmod, when is there any
> legitimate need for it these days?

I think being a system language, that alone is a good reason to keep some
sort of octal notation. But well, maybe for these rare cases a nasty
"compile-time string literal" can be used like chmod(path, oct!("664"));

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hey you, standing in the aisles
With itchy feet and fading smiles
Can you feel me?