------- Additional Comments From j at uriah dot heep dot sax dot de 2005-08-19
18:55 -------
(In reply to comment #9)
Thank you very much for the useful comments.
> The patch does not document how the types of binary constants are
> determined. I suppose the rules are the same as for octal and
> hexadecimal constants, but the documentation needs to say so.
Yes, I simply didn't think about that.
> The patch does not document the 0B prefix, although the code accepts
> it.
Hmm, I thought that was obvious... OK.
> The documentation should say @samp{0}, @samp{1}, @samp{0b}.
OK.
> You can't write diagnostics like ...
> because this doesn't work with i18n.
Ah, well, understood.
> It's not clear how you ensure that someone can't write floating
> point numbers as e.g. 0b1e2 (the check for floats says in part
> "radix <= 10 && (c == 'e' || c == 'E')" which would allow binary,
> being designed to allow 8 (0123e4 being decimal but looking like
> octal at first) and 10).
I didn't realize the same parser would also parse FP numbers. Sure,
FP numbers are allowed to start with 0x these days... I'll see how to
resolve that.
> The patch is missing testcases.
Is there a tutorial anywhere how to run testcases?
> If you don't already have a copyright assignment on file ...
I do have.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23479
