On 4/2/11 5:27 PM, ulrik.mikaels...@gmail.com wrote:
A D-newbie would probably be able to guess 0o for octal, but hardly octal!. octal! breaks the rule of least surprise.
I fail to infer how using the word "octal" for an octal literal is surprising at all.
This thread is a good example that it's impossible to please everyone. Although past discussions made it clear that most everyone found leading 0 a poor convention for octal numbers, now not only the consensus is weaker, but some actually claim a different solution is superior. If that were chosen, then all of a sudden octal!777 would have become suddenly sexy and so on.
The grass is always greener on the other side... Andrei
