From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from math.gatech.edu (euclid.skiles.gatech.edu [130.207.146.50]) by werple.net.au (8.7/8.7.1) with SMTP id WAA24048 for ; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 22:21:11 +1100 (EST) Received: by math.gatech.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id FAA00293; Fri, 3 Nov 1995 05:55:43 -0500 Resent-Date: Fri, 3 Nov 1995 05:55:43 -0500 Old-Return-Path: Message-Id: <199511031058.FAA01596@redwood.skiles.gatech.edu> X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.4 10/10/95 To: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Subject: Re: Octal interpretation In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 03 Nov 1995 10:01:46 +0100." <9511030901.AA21400@sgi.ifh.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 03 Nov 1995 05:58:19 -0500 From: Richard Coleman Resent-Message-ID: <"cq7hz.0.V4.kKVcm"@euclid> Resent-From: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/520 X-Loop: zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu Precedence: list Resent-Sender: zsh-workers-request@math.gatech.edu > I am heartily sick of being told my stack is unbalanced because the > time happens to be 12:08. Based on the following two facts, > > 1) No valid octal number ever starts 08 or 09 > > 2) 08 and 09 are the only two digit numbers evaluated incorrectly > > I would like to propose that zstrtol explicitly checks for an 8 or a 9 > following the 0 and if there is one evaluates it in decimal. This > will mean times can be handled properly --- what I mainly use > arithmetic in zsh for anyway --- while real octal numbers won't be > affected. > > Anybody writing scripts for users where this may matter should in any > case be stripping leading 0's as a matter of course. If that's a big > problem, we should simply remove octal handling. (What's wrong with > 8#77 etc. anyway? Isn't this just why ksh introduced that syntax?) I've been planning on getting back to this. My first thoughts are to just reverted back to decimail as the default. rc