[TUHS] // comment in C++

[lars@nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff)]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 850 bytes --]

Michael Kjörling <michael at kjorling.se> writes:
> That wouldn't have anything to do with how ^@ is a somewhat common
> representation of 000, would it? (Yes, using octal on purpose.) I've
> always kind of wondered where that notation came from.  That ^A
> through ^Z were representations of 001 through 032 makes more sense.

Look at two slices of the ASCII table:

  0 ^@    64 @
  1 ^A    65 A
  2 ^B    66 B
  3 ^C    67 C
  4 ^D    68 D
  5 ^E    69 E
  6 ^F    70 F
  7 ^G    71 G
  8 ^H    72 H
  9 ^I    73 I
 10 ^J    74 J
 11 ^K    75 K
 12 ^L    76 L
 13 ^M    77 M
 14 ^N    78 N
 15 ^O    79 O
 16 ^P    80 P
 17 ^Q    81 Q
 18 ^R    82 R
 19 ^S    83 S
 20 ^T    84 T
 21 ^U    85 U
 22 ^V    86 V
 23 ^W    87 W
 24 ^X    88 X
 25 ^Y    89 Y
 26 ^Z    90 Z
 27 ^[    91 [
 28 ^\    92 \
 29 ^]    93 ]
 30 ^^    94 ^
 31 ^_    95 _