<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 3/15/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Georg Brandl</b> <<a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a>> wrote:</span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Until now, I skipped the octal thread. Now I read this and wondered, "what the<br>hell is 0t6065 supposed to mean" and only from the context I gathered that it<br>would be an octal literal...<br><br>Seriously, nobody, even coming from another language, will be able to look at it
<br>and say, "yes, that's an octal literal."</blockquote><div><br>Yes. Raymond's (and Guido's and others') point is that hardly anybody knows what an octal literal is in the first place, and the less-explicit syntax of '06065' gives confusing results to those who don't. You can't accidentily use this new syntax.
<br></div></div><br>-- <br>Thomas Wouters <<a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a>><br><br>Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!