Issue 3120 - WG21 CWG Issues
Title
Incorrect description for interpreting integer literals
Status
open
Section
5.13.2 [lex.icon]
Submitter
Masaki Moriguchi

Created on 2025-11-08.00:00:00 last changed 3 weeks ago

Messages

msg8383 (view)
Date: 2025-11-17.20:37:45

Possible resolution:

Change in 5.13.2 [lex.icon] paragraph 1 as follows:

In an integer-literal,
  • the sequence of binary-digits, octal-digits, digits, or hexadecimal-digits or
  • the sequence of digits in an octal-literal or decimal-literal
is are interpreted as a base N integer as shown in Table 7; the lexically first digit of the sequence of digits is the most significant.
msg8382 (view)
Date: 2025-11-08.00:00:00

(From submission #794.)

The octal integer literal 0 is not covered by the rule in 5.13.2 [lex.icon] paragraph 1.
History
Date User Action Args
2025-11-17 20:37:45adminsetmessages: + msg8383
2025-11-08 00:00:00admincreate