You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Our grammar in https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/tokens.html#number-literals currently does not document that octal and binary literals are lexed with all decimal digits; it should do so and then remark in the prose that such literals are lexed as one token but are semantically invalid.
alercah
added
C-bug
Incorrect statements, terminology, or rendering issues
Easy
We believe this would not be difficult to actually fix
labels
Apr 3, 2018
alercah
changed the title
Document RFC 0879 (small-base-lexing)
Document RFC 0879 (small-base-lexing) and RFC 0464 (future-proof-literal-suffixes)
Apr 4, 2018
alercah
changed the title
Document RFC 0879 (small-base-lexing) and RFC 0464 (future-proof-literal-suffixes)
Document RFC 0879 (small-base-lexing) and RFC 0463 (future-proof-literal-suffixes)
Apr 4, 2018
Just checking my understanding: You're saying that the lexer sees 0b110127 as a malformed token rather than a BIN_LITERAL immediately followed by a DEC_LITERAL as the documentation suggests it should?
If so, are you sure you want to change the doc rather than the lexer?
RFC 0879
[RFC 0463](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0463-future-proof-literal-suffixes.md
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: