Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@xxxxxxx> writes: > ISO/IEC 9899:1990 section 6.1.3.4 has this to say: This differs from my account in not requiring the first octal digit after backslash to be zero. Thank you for correcting that; "\61", indeed, works as "1" in C. (Thus, there are enough digits to represent any value of an octet.) > In any case, my original point was not to get into a discussion of the > finer details of character escapes in particular programming > languages, nor to suggest that every escape permitted by C or Perl be > used in this context. Rather, it was to point out that the existing, > commonly-used convention for character escapes of this form uses octal > digits, not decimal, and that differing in this particular way would > be likely to lead to confusion. Agreed. > [...] it is likely to lead to significant confusion. I also agree that "\027" for ESC is unnecessarily confusing. -- Stanislav Shalunov http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ This message is designed to be viewed in boustrophedon. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf