Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

• Subject: Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal.
• From: Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo <lhf@...>
• Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:45:05 -0200

---

> >It would be nice to have a long literal that was actually literal for when 
> >you need precise values.
The manual says that long strings are for text.

---

• References:
  • Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal., Jim Studt
  • Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal., Rapin Patrick
  • Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal., Jim Studt
  • Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal., Finn Wilcox

• Prev by Date: Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal.
• Next by Date: Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal.
• Previous by thread: Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal.
• Next by thread: Re: Bug: Literal strings in long format are not quite literal.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread