"Stephen Hansen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | On 3/15/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > | > I'm neutral about the choice between 0o, 0c or 0t. | | | Interested Lurker Opinion: Can it be a "small" character? 0x1 leaps out for | me because of the fact that numbers are all "tall" and the x is short-- so | having that difference in height makes it very clear this is not a normal | base 10 number when I'm scanning text. 0o755 does the same, as does 0c755. | Heck, even 0b10100 looks fine even though the 'b' has a stalk, since its | bottom-heavy with the stalk off to the side. | | However, a 't' is a tall and relatively streamlined character... 0t755 looks | all jumbled together and doesn't provide as clear a visual indicator that | something abnormal is going on here. I periodically have to use octal | numbers, and so far am only using them with the int() function because I | don't find 0755 as readily expressive of "Hi! I'm Octal!" as I'd like. 0t755 | wouldn't be much of an improvement; but anything else short would be, from | 0o755 to 0c755 to ... 0a755 .. or whatever. :)
I agree. 0t = base two?, three?, ten?, thirteen?, twenty? ;-) tjr _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
