I agree that backslash string wrapping is obscure.
I do use it a lot, but I would not be sad to see it go.
The same is true for \a, \b, \f, \v, \EM, \DC1, etc.
We do need \, though.
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Evan Laforge qdun...@gmail.com wrote:
The backslash string wrapping feature is
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:01 AM, Lennart Augustsson
lenn...@augustsson.net wrote:
I agree that backslash string wrapping is obscure.
I do use it a lot, but I would not be sad to see it go.
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Henrik Nilsson
henrik.nils...@nottingham.ac.uk wrote:
I find it quite
On Friday, 5 October 2012 at 15:34, Evan Laforge wrote:
On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Henrik Nilsson
henrik.nils...@nottingham.ac.uk (mailto:henrik.nils...@nottingham.ac.uk)
wrote:
The same is true for \a, \b, \f, \v, \EM, \DC1, etc.
We do need \, though.
What is \ used for? I
\xe\x1 is unambiguous.
There are two things wrong with this solution:
(1) It descends to another level of discourse--binary encoding of characters.
(2) It does not actually eliminate the need for \. Consider the
string \SOH1. It cannot be written \x11, or even \x011.
Doug McIlroy
