"spir" <denis.s...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.1504.1297453559.4748.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > Hello, > > Just had a strange bug --in a test func!-- caused by this notation. This > is due in my case to the practice (common, I guess) of "pretty printing" > int numbers using %0nd or %0ns format, to get a nice alignment. Then, if > one feeds back results into D code, they are interpreted as octal... > Now, i know it: will pad with spaces instead ;-) > > Copying a string'ed integer is indeed not the only this notation is > bug-prone: prefixing a number with '0' should not change its value (!). > Several programming languages switched to another notation; like 0onnn, > which is consistent with common hex & bin notations and cannot lead to > misinterpretation. Such a change would be, I guess, backward compatible; > and would not be misleading for C coders. >
Yea, octal!"nnn" has already made the exceedingly rare uses of octal literals completely obsolete *long* ago. I know I for one am getting really tired of this completely unnecessary landmine in the language continuing to exist. The heck with std.xml, if anything, *this* needs nuked. If silently changed behavior is a problem, then just make it an error. Done. Minefield cleared.
