"Walter Bright" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > > Good point. As I recall, we expended an enormous amount of effort working > on template syntax, and I certainly feel that > > octal!"177" > > is far better than, say: > > octal<"177">.value > > but when I compare it to > > 0177 > > that's just hard to beat. A customized syntax is always going to be better > than a generic one.
I agree that "A customized syntax is always going to be better than a generic one", all else being equal (hence my distaste for the enum-related mixin stuff in other branches of this thread). But I still very much fail to see how anyone can consider being able to change a number's value simply by adding (or removing) a leading zero to be anywhere remotely near "hard to beat". Though I suppose we've already tread this ground 64 times before (oops, I mean "a hundred").
