Don wrote:
and what the heck does "\000000\000000000\000\0000" mean?
It doesn't matter, because if you're translating C code to D, the code is probably correct even if you don't know what it means.
I doubt there is much extant C code which uses octal. Automated translations of octal literals can be done accurately, and you're even supplying the 'htod' converter!
htod is not intended for creating implementation source code. It's just for headers. I expect most C translations will be done by hand.
Note that C# doesn't have octal literals, but does include \0. So there's a precedent for dropping them. This also means that right now, converting code from C# to D can also introduce obscure bugs. I'd argue that that's a scenario that is at least as likely as bugs from C.
It is a good point, but I don't see people translating C# to D. But I do see translating C to D (I do it myself!).
I think the argument for octal is very, very weak.
The issue is really the cost of it being in vs the benefit of pulling it out. I see very little cost of leaving it in, so it doesn't need much benefit to make it worthwhile.
