Message136477
| Author |
mark.dickinson |
| Recipients |
Peter.Wentworth, eric.smith, ezio.melotti, mark.dickinson, nadeem.vawda, petri.lehtinen, r.david.murray, rhettinger, stutzbach |
| Date |
2011年05月21日.20:17:44 |
| SpamBayes Score |
1.352254e-08 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1306009065.91.0.568094019747.issue12127@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
It does look as though all the arguments were pretty thoroughly hashed out on the python-3000 list when this was first proposed. See e.g., the thread starting at:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-March/006262.html
and various follow-on threads. I retract my suggestion that this should be discussed again on python-dev; it probably wouldn't achieve anything.
On the subject of other languages, I was rather hoping that more recent and enlightened languages would have done away with the leading zero implies octal business. It looks as though C# has, at least, but I was a bit disappointed to see that Go still has leading-zero octal literals.
For the old-school languages, I'd still expect that for most users this feature is more often a surprising gotcha than expected and useful.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/565634/integer-with-leading-zeroes
Anyway, +0 for closing as 'rejected'. (Or perhaps 'wont fix'.) |
|