http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2656



--- Comment #19 from Sobirari Muhomori <dfj1es...@sneakemail.com> 2010-11-28 
09:53:36 PST ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> D should follow Python's lead in removing the archaic, subtle, and unintuitive
> format for octal literals. The obvious choices are of the form 0c45 and 0o45.
> The key argument used for the "0o" format is here:
> 
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-February/060351.html
> 
> and basically argues that since in printf(), "%o" is used for octal, whereas
> "c" is used for char, "o" is the natural choice.

Haha, this printf argument is laughable. With printf %#x will prepend 0x prefix
to hex number, you can't do this for octal and binary numbers.
I think, 0o775 is ok (you can see it just here). He has a good point that it's
leading zero that signals "something nice is here" and size of o is enough to
figure out, what is this. 0c is just a syntactical hack in attempt to not use
0o.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to