[Python-3000] Updated PEP: Integer literal syntax and radices (was octal/binary discussion)

[Jim Jewett]

On 3/19/07, Patrick Maupin <pmaupin at gmail.com> wrote:
> It was pointed out to me that, since I suggested
> upper/lowercase was an issue for another PEP,
> removal of uppercase octal/binary belonged in that same PEP

Removal of uppercase from other formats would affect backwards
compatibility.  For binary and octal, it is simply a matter of not
adding additional alternative ways to do it.

Consistency with hex and floats is worth something, but I don't think
it is important enough to justify adding new support for the confusing
O0.  (Remember, the choice was 0t when uppercase support was still
expected.)

Also note that the case distinction can matter in output, because
other systems might already assume a certain case for hex or floating
point; I haven't heard of any external systems that already recognize
O0 but not O0, or 0B but not 0b.  If we don't support it on output,
then the symmetry is already broken, and there is no reason to support
it on input.

>       ...  int(token) and int(token, 2-36)
>       are not modified by this proposal.

int(token, 16) accepts (but does not require) a leading 0x.

I assume that the code for 2 and 8 will also begin to allow a leading prefix.

-jJ