Re: Using C23 digit separators not locale digit grouping characters

[Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2422 bytes --]

Hi Tom

On 2/3/23 14:27, Tom Schwindl wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> 
> On Fri Feb 3, 2023 at 12:59 AM CET, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>> On 2/2/23 23:29, Brian Inglis wrote:> Hi Alex,
>>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>>>
>>> Took your views on board and changed man2 pages.
>>> Attached summary only has file names and changed lines.
>>
>> I prefer inline in the email :)
>>
>>> Would like feedback on what to continue doing and what to forget doing before
>>> starting man3?
>>
>> See below.
>>
>>> Of note for review are open.2 octal perms,
>>
>> The octals read a bit weirder than the others.  Please keep them in a separate
>> patch, so we can decide on it later.  But I wouldn't discard it for now.
>>
> 
> I wonder if I'm the only one who thinks that the digit separators look
> irritating for both, hex and octal.

Hex ones don't seem weird to to me.
Octal does.  However, I've always been irritated by octals, due to the prefix 
being confused with part of the value.  I'd prefer C introducing Python's 0o prefix.

> The reason for using them in the first place
> is to make numbers more readable and thus get them "out of the way".
> As of my experience, it's not common to use separators for neither hex or octal.

Of course it's not common.  They didn't exist before :)
In decimals we use them because non-programming contexts always had them.  Since 
hexs are almost exclusive of programming, it's normal that tradition doesn't 
have them.  However, we use spaces often for hexs and binaries, especially in 
classes, to help distinguish the magnitude of the number, and improve 
readability in general.  I think using a standard separator is the best thing we 
can use (spaces in the man pages would be mnisleading).

> I think we're going against what people are used to and more importantly, what
> is generally found in code and documentation. We might archive the opposite of
> what we try to do.

That's true.  We're doing some important changes, which is why I want to be 
careful.  IMO, I think the patches improve the documentation, but if there's 
general consensus that it will be worse, we can revert them any time, so let's 
see how this develops.

> 
> Just my 2 cents.
> 
> --
> Best Regards,
> Tom Schwindl

Thanks for the comments!

Cheers,

Alex

-- 
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
GPG key fingerprint: A9348594CE31283A826FBDD8D57633D441E25BB5

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]