Annoying octal notation

[Albert van der Horst]

In article <6031ba08-08c8-416b-91db-ce8ff57ae8e5 at w6g2000yqw.googlegroups.com>,
James Harris  <james.harris.1 at googlemail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
>So you are saying that Smalltalk has <base in decimal>r<number> where
>r is presumably for radix? That's maybe best of all. It preserves the
>syntactic requirement of starting a number with a digit and seems to
>have greatest flexibility. Not sure how good it looks but it's
>certainly not bad.
>
>  0xff & 0x0e | 0b1101
>  16rff & 16r0e | 2r1101
>
>Hmm. Maybe a symbol would be better than a letter.

Like 0#ff  16#ff ?

That is ALGOL68. It is incredible how many of it has become
vindicated over time. (Yes, nineteen hundred sixty eight was
the year that language was conceived.)

>
>James

Groetjes Albert

--
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert at spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst