Piet van Oostrum wrote:
Derek Martin <c...@pizzashack.org> (DM) wrote:
DM> I fail to see how 0O012, or even 0o012 is more intelligible than 012.
DM> The latter reads like a typo, and the former is virtually
DM> indistinguishable from 00012, O0012, or many other combinations that
DM> someone might accidentally type (or intentionally type, having to do
DM> this in dozens of other programming languages).
You're right. Either hexadecimal should have been 0h or octal should
have been 0t :=)
I have seen the use of Q/q instead in order to make it clearer. I still
prefer Smalltalk's 16rFF and 8r377.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
