Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Hex string literals (was Re: C23 thoughts and opinions)
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 11:04:09 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 32
Message-ID: <865xu6jffq.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <v2l828$18v7f$1@dont-email.me> <87msoh5uh6.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <f08d2c9f-5c2e-495d-b0bd-3f71bd301432@gmail.com> <v2nbp4$1o9h6$1@dont-email.me> <v2ng4n$1p3o2$1@dont-email.me> <87y18047jk.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <87msoe1xxo.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v2sh19$2rle2$2@dont-email.me> <87ikz11osy.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v2v59g$3cr0f$1@dont-email.me> <87plt8yxgn.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v31rj5$o20$1@dont-email.me> <87cyp6zsen.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v34gi3$j385$1@dont-email.me> <874jahznzt.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v36nf9$12bei$1@dont-email.me> <87v82b43h6.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <87iky830v7.fsf_-_@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v4pd8t$m52o$1@dont-email.me> <86v826kdxn.fsf@linuxsc.com> <20240618123940.00007f1a@yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 20:04:10 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d4aeba7b4aaab0d94b94221c1561c3e8";
	logging-data="1536444"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19z5Jqnmw5nXGjIRyXcq42KA/aBy8EJliE="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tzmU440sJhEzrP6FOwtbtEURZ+s=
	sha1:vo4eNRKw2OKKlUcj7wswEP0MMn8=
Bytes: 3154

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

> On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 22:39:00 -0700
> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
>
>> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>
>>> AFAIK nobody uses octal anymore.
>>
>> There are circumstances where being able to write constants
>> in octal is useful.  It also would be nice to be able to
>> write constants in base 4 and base 32 (because 5 is half
>> of 10).  I don't have occasion to prefer octal very often
>> but I'm glad it's there for those times when I do.
>
> Ada/VHDL permits any base from 2 to 16.  They didn't go as far up as
> 32.
> I would imagine that reading base 32 number would take time to become
> accustomed.
> Besides, using I and O as digits is problematic because of visual
> similarity to 1 an 0.  Using l is problematic both because of visual
> similarity to 1 and because of clash with existing use as suffix.

It would be nice (in some circumstances) to be able to write
constants in base 32.  That doesn't mean I'm proposing that
such constants be written using the common 10-digits-22-letters
form of representation.  Realistically I think it's unlikely
that the C standard will ever add a base-32 form for integer
constants, and even if it did I wouldn't want to wait that
long before it could be used reliably.  So all I'm saying is
that base-32 constants are sometimes useful, even if they
aren't incorporated into standard C.