Andrew Koenig wrote: >>I definately agree with the 0c664 octal literal. Seems rather more >>intuitive. > > > I still prefer 8r664.
664[8] looks better and allows any radix _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
