Thread overview | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
September 19, 2012 Why do not have `0o` prefix for octal numbers? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Some time ago I've asked on SO why most languages have `0` prefix for octal numbers. My opinion is the same as D designers that it cause a lot of bugs, but why octal numbers are avaible only by using `std.conv.octal`? |
September 19, 2012 Re: Why do not have `0o` prefix for octal numbers? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Hauleth | On Wednesday, 19 September 2012 at 16:02:41 UTC, Hauleth wrote:
> Some time ago I've asked on SO why most languages have `0` prefix for octal numbers. My opinion is the same as D designers that it cause a lot of bugs, but why octal numbers are avaible only by using `std.conv.octal`?
How often do you use octal numbers? The reason is simply to avoid language feature creep where a library solution is perfectly acceptable.
David
|
September 19, 2012 Re: Why do not have `0o` prefix for octal numbers? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Hauleth | On Wednesday, 19 September 2012 at 16:02:41 UTC, Hauleth wrote:
> Some time ago I've asked on SO why most languages have `0` prefix for octal numbers. My opinion is the same as D designers that it cause a lot of bugs, but why octal numbers are avaible only by using `std.conv.octal`?
AFAIK: It is experimental. "The $(D octal) facility is intended as an experimental facility to replace _octal literals starting with $(D '0'), which many find confusing."
The reason for deprecating "0" prefix was indeed because of bugs. Then it was noticed that a library solution was available, and as a rule of thumb, if the library can do it, it is moved from the language to the library.
You'll see a lot of threads talking about "scope", which went the same way (which is now a library feature, not a language feature).
IMO, deprecating "0765" was a good move. Personally, I'd rather have had "0o765" instead of "octal!765" (if only for highlighting). But I don't think it is a big deal.
|
September 20, 2012 Re: Why do not have `0o` prefix for octal numbers? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to monarch_dodra | On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 12:15:19 -0400, monarch_dodra <monarchdodra@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wednesday, 19 September 2012 at 16:02:41 UTC, Hauleth wrote: >> Some time ago I've asked on SO why most languages have `0` prefix for octal numbers. My opinion is the same as D designers that it cause a lot of bugs, but why octal numbers are avaible only by using `std.conv.octal`? > > AFAIK: It is experimental. "The $(D octal) facility is intended as an experimental facility to replace _octal literals starting with $(D '0'), which many find confusing." That comment is very old. It is no longer experimental. If you want an explanation, see here: http://www.drdobbs.com/tools/user-defined-literals-in-the-d-programmi/229401068 -Steve |
September 20, 2012 Re: Why do not have `0o` prefix for octal numbers? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Steven Schveighoffer | On Thursday, 20 September 2012 at 18:12:50 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Sep 2012 12:15:19 -0400, monarch_dodra <monarchdodra@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 19 September 2012 at 16:02:41 UTC, Hauleth wrote:
>>> Some time ago I've asked on SO why most languages have `0` prefix for octal numbers. My opinion is the same as D designers that it cause a lot of bugs, but why octal numbers are avaible only by using `std.conv.octal`?
>>
>> AFAIK: It is experimental. "The $(D octal) facility is intended as an experimental facility to replace _octal literals starting with $(D '0'), which many find confusing."
>
> That comment is very old. It is no longer experimental.
>
> If you want an explanation, see here:
>
> http://www.drdobbs.com/tools/user-defined-literals-in-the-d-programmi/229401068
>
> -Steve
Very interesting read. TY.
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation