> That does not sound entirely sane to me: I think you're suggesting > that a programmer would duplicate some set of numeric literals, just > so they could put digit separators in one copy of them. The risk of > the two copies becoming out-of-sync seems like sufficient > justification for any reasonable programmer to avoid that. Also, > consider that #if-guarded code still needs to successfully tokenize, > and literals with odd numbers of digit separators do not tokenize in > C++11 and before.
I just want to remind everyone that the tokenization argument was made before, but it was defused when it was pointed out that conditional compilation directives could surround an #include directive for a file containing literals with apostrophes. On the other hand, the duplication argument is a really good one, and is better still if the constants of different forms wind up having to be in different source files. Clark _______________________________________________ Features mailing list [email protected] http://www.open-std.org/mailman/listinfo/features
