Re: Literals, take 2

[email protected] (Jonathan Scott Duff) Thu, 14 Nov 2002 13:59:41 -0600

Newsgroups	perl.perl6.documentation
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:40:38PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> Michael Lazzaro escribiÃ³:
> > We should talk about this.  My original proposal was to do this:
> >
> > (Case 1) base 2-10: use 0..9
> >
> > (Case 2) base 11-36: use (0..9, a..z), but allow A..Z such that
> >
> > 	0x00ff == 0x00FF
> >
> > .... which seems necessary, IMHO.
> >
> > (Case 3) base 37-62: use (0..9,a..z,A..Z), such that
> >
> > 	60:ff != 60:FF
> >
> > .... this is obviously inconsistent w/ Case (2), but is darn useful
> > sometimes.
> 
> I would preferer to limit the usage of "letter notation" to just base 
> 11-36, and have n:F = n:f for every n.

Me too.

> It is simpler, and we can always use de "dot notation" for bigger 
> bases. 

What he said.

-Scott
-- 
Jonathan Scott Duff
[email protected]