At 12:37 AM +0200 10/29/02, Markus Laire wrote:
On 28 Oct 2002 at 16:42, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:39 PM -0500 10/28/02, brian wheeler wrote:
>On Mon, 2002-10-28 at 16:25, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>
>> explicit radix specifications for integers:
>> 0123 - decimal
>> 2:0110 - binary [also b:0110?]
>> 8:123 - octal [also o:123?]
>> 16:123 - hex [also h:123?]
>> 256:192.168.1.0 - base 256
>> (...etc...)
>>
>
>I've got to admit that I've not paid alot of attention to this
>thread...but does that mean 0x1234 and 01234 (octal) go away or is
>this an omission?
While we're at it, maybe we can add in 0rMCM to allow roman numerals
too... --
What about specifying endiannes also, or would that be too low-level
to even consider? Currently I don't have any examples for where it
might even be used...
Nope, not a problem. Roman Numerals are big-endian by definition.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
