Amaury Forgeot d'Arc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
Corrected as r62480.
I changed your patch a little bit: it seemed more logical to use
(c < '0' || c >= '8')
As it is the exact counterpart of
('0' <= c && c < '8')
used a few lines below.
Thanks for the report!
--
nosy:
New submission from Lukas Meuser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Octal literals containing an 8 or a 9 should raise a SyntaxError, but 8 ist
accepted as the first character of such a literal (e.g., 0o8 or 0o876, but
not 0o678). Those literals evaluate to 0.0.
The fix for this is trivial, a patch against c
