+1
> On Sep 1, 2015, at 5:05 PM, Andreas Woess <andreas.wo...@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> Bikeshedding is welcomed :) I've uploaded a new webrev[1] with
> s/BINARY_LITERAL/BINARY_NUMBER/ and an es6 flag in Lexer as suggested by
> Sundar.
>
> [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aw/8134873/webrev.01/
>
> Thanks,
> Andreas
>
> On 01/09/15 16:42, Attila Szegedi wrote:
>> - How about we use BINARY_NUMBER instead of BINARY_LITERAL? I know this is
>> bikeshedding… It’s still more consisent with other literal token types (e.g.
>> NULL and STRING) that don’t have the _LITERAL suffix. If we made it
>> consistent the other way round, we’d have to have NULL_LITERAL,
>> STRING_LITERAL, etc. Of course, we can just choose to live with the
>> inconsistency and leave it as it is.
>>
>> - These literals should only be recognized with --language=es6, shouldn’t
>> they? In the current form, it seems like the code will recognize them with
>> es5 language too, won’t it?
>>
>> Attila.
>>
>>> On Sep 1, 2015, at 4:30 PM, Andreas Woess <andreas.wo...@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Please reviewhttp://cr.openjdk.java.net/~aw/8134873/
>>> forhttps://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8134873
>>>
>>> Implements Lexer/Parser support for ECMAScript 6 binary (0b) and octal (0o)
>>> literals. I've renamed OCTAL (legacy octal literal, e.g. 0777) to
>>> OCTAL_LEGACY and added OCTAL and BINARY_LITERAL token types (the _LITERAL
>>> suffix is to disambiguate with TokenKind.BINARY).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Andreas
>>>
>
