On 14/03/2007 6.38, Greg Ewing wrote:
>> Do we deprecate it followed by a later removal (so as to "resist the
>> temptation to guess")? If so, sounds good to me (I've never had a use
>> for octal literals).
>
> I think that *some* syntax should be provided for octal
> literals.
If we get to the point that builtin calls are compile-time optimized (and we
really really should), int("1234", 8) could even be folded at byte-code level.
--
Giovanni Bajo
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
