Andrei: > 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,
The consensus was as much strong as now that the leading zero to denote octals is bad. But even in past some people (like me) have suggested more than one replacement syntax (see Bugzilla). So I am seeing nothing new in the discussions of today. > If that were chosen, then all of a sudden octal!777 would have become > suddenly sexy and so on. You have no proof of this. By the way, I am happy of this (unannounced) change. Bye, bearophile
