220 18826 <0BFD63DF-62AC-482D-AE87-3BA04130A053@mac.com> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Krauss Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: 0o for Octal? Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 09:58:01 +0800 Lines: 91 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <0BFD63DF-62AC-482D-AE87-3BA04130A053@mac.com> References: <81dc7616-d144-4405-a64c-b69fb5aa0abb@isocpp.org> <2094802.Ui3CpkS94V@tjmaciei-mobl4> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\)) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0E50332D-7365-490D-9A25-E6E6B6C86BC2" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1435370302 1818 80.91.229.3 (27 Jun 2015 01:58:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 01:58:22 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBAABBMUGXCWAKGQEELSZDCA@isocpp.org Sat Jun 27 03:58:13 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-ie0-f197.google.com ([209.85.223.197]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z8fNk-0003qN-44 for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 03:58:12 +0200 Original-Received: by iecuq6 with SMTP id uq6sf64076491iec.2 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 18:58:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-type:message-id:mime-version :subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=2QLAi+l0tYJyqrtLnhK0cvuXhdUWQSpgVtafpS8iiO0=; b=Ahr+f7kXuEyPnyZgiZU9kpZfzVahLqwSbat52gMV5bChodwuSA00hESA3QFHgy+LtF OXuRRVYgPB9t1iuSsuS1w9YZLAJTUWuQiE51QdP7uv+OUxkUkkeLTBiAiPNgxLK7Zl2x begA+jq5g+oeNtroemAaJrRMEtJJj+C8d9g+64/gRijJsHbeeiKNqdZoJhBGGhvoqlKc Z1wzlze426WraKkY8MILMRKlKXmmdqY9tOF3d41Zy9N4wWCNIvJnT0jDpiUY230PZNVZ Hk9OlIK0JUz0yEdJB0vYyroE1+jP5aygrTvO+SNgLznPTij+y6h57Hk3dOnzHIr4HLFx 4hfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmR+1MjxDpLnbV8cP4YpoG94MuZTpPMC1frBUClSu3J+utN0gd6/Jq6vMJAfOsxh2Dj8yrP X-Received: by 10.42.211.82 with SMTP id gn18mr7039183icb.2.1435370291061; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 18:58:11 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.107.16.215 with SMTP id 84ls1531280ioq.71.gmail; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 18:58:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.70.118.5 with SMTP id ki5mr9081660pdb.6.1435370290205; Fri, 26 Jun 2015 18:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from nk11p04mm-asmtp002.mac.com (nk11p04mm-asmtpout002.mac.com. [17.158.236.237]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x10si53092185pdr.182.2015.06.26.18.58.10 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Jun 2015 18:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of potswa@mac.com designates 17.158.236.237 as permitted sender) client-ip=17.158.236.237; Original-Received: from [172.20.10.2] (unknown [121.54.44.94]) by nk11p04mm-asmtp002.mac.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.35.0 64bit (built Mar 31 2015)) with ESMTPSA id <0NQK00JDFYSQQV00@nk11p04mm-asmtp002.mac.com> for std-proposals@isocpp.org; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 01:58:09 +0000 (GMT) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.14.151,1.0.33,0.0.0000 definitions=2015-06-26_07:2015-06-26,2015-06-26,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1412110000 definitions=main-1506270024 In-reply-to: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098) X-Original-Sender: potswa@mac.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of potswa@mac.com designates 17.158.236.237 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=potswa@mac.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=mac.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Spam-Checked-In-Group: std-proposals@isocpp.org X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:18826 Archived-At: --Apple-Mail=_0E50332D-7365-490D-9A25-E6E6B6C86BC2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > On 2015=E2=80=9306=E2=80=9327, at 8:13 AM, Arthur O'Dwyer wrote: >=20 > On Friday, June 26, 2015 at 4:07:00 PM UTC-7, Olaf van der Spek wrote: >=20 > Why are they using octal for those? =20 >=20 > Why is anyone debating "removal of octal notation from C++" who's never h= eard of file permissions? > `man 2 chmod` and have your mind blown. The incredible thing is the same folks debating adding an alternative octal= notation. Is there any other use for octal? This is like saying trigraphs are bad=E2=80=A6 and proposing alternative tr= igraphs. Oh wait, that actually happened. (To be pedantic, see POSIX for the constants that tend to be octal, e.g. S_= IRWXU not O_RDWR. And, these are required to be macros, they cannot be enum= erations at the implementation=E2=80=99s discretion. The problem is complet= ely unsolvable except by decoupling the C++ interface from the C header. I = didn=E2=80=99t mention this earlier because the discussion seemed to be ove= r=E2=80=A6) --=20 ---=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa= ls/. --Apple-Mail=_0E50332D-7365-490D-9A25-E6E6B6C86BC2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
On 2015=E2=80=9306= =E2=80=9327, at 8:13 AM, Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer@gmail.com> wrote:

On Friday, June 26, 2015 at 4:07:00 PM UTC-7, Olaf van der Spek wrote= :
<= div class=3D"">
Why are they using octa= l for those?  

=
Why is anyone debating "removal of octal notation fro= m C++" who's never heard of file permissions?
`man 2 c= hmod` and have your mind blown.

The incredible thing is the same folks debating adding an alternative octal notation. Is there any other use= for octal?

This is like saying trigrap= hs are bad=E2=80=A6 and proposing alternative trigraphs. Oh wait, that actu= ally happened.

(To be pedantic, see&nbs= p;POSIX for the constants that tend to be oct= al, e.g. S_IRWXU not O_RDWR. And, these are required to b= e macros, they cannot be enumerations at the implementation=E2=80=99s discr= etion. The problem is completely unsolvable except by decoupling the C++ in= terface from the C header. I didn=E2=80=99t mention this earlier because th= e discussion seemed to be over=E2=80=A6)

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposa= ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/<= /a>.
--Apple-Mail=_0E50332D-7365-490D-9A25-E6E6B6C86BC2-- .