On Fri, 9 Sep 2016, Martin Sebor wrote: > I mentioned the hex vs octal notation to invite input into which > of the two of them people would prefer to see used by the %qc and > qs directives, and whether it's worth considering changing the %qE > directive to use the same notation as well, for consistency (and > to help with readability if there is consensus that one is clearer > than the other).
I do think hex is the way to go, and that it would be good to be consistent across the board. (All e-mail alert, but I don't think I saw a response to that.) > What I meant by ambiguity is for example a string like "\1234" > where it's not obvious where the octal sequence ends. Is it '\1' > followed by "234" or '\12' followed by "34" or '\123' followed > by "4"? (It's only possible to tell if one knows that GCC always > uses three digits for the octal character, but not everyone knows > that.) Agreed. And octal notation is just not very common today, too, I'd argue. Gerald
