On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Christopher Wright <dhase...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've been looking at dil and lexing D. Lexing character literals and string > literals is not quite so easy as I thought it would be, but overall not > difficult either. > > One thing I'm curious about: > There are three forms of hex literals: > \x: 2 digits > \u: 4 digits > \U: 8 digits > > There is one form of octal literal: > \: 1 to 3 digits > > Why? With hex literals, each option is a fixed width. That is sensible. > > Octal literals aren't necessary with hex literals, but they might be > convenient. However, making them variable width seems like it opens up the > possibility for obscure bugs. I would not recommend that anyone use octal > literals, and I don't think they're an advantage to the language. Even if > they were, their current representation is not.
People use octal? Agreed.
