Re: Implicit enum conversions are a stupid PITA

[bearophile]

Adam D. Ruppe:
> What about O!177?

See the answer by Andrei:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2656

The answer is essentially: how can you represent very large 64 bit octal values 
with that syntax?

Bye,
bearophile