From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 4 Aug 93 14:43:29 GMT
From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!news.ans.net!newsgate.
watson.ibm.com!yktnews.watson.ibm.com!ncohen@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Norman H. Co
hen)
Subject: Re: Underscore ("_") in numeric literals
Message-ID: <CB8owH.qzo@yktnews.watson.ibm.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <23622cINN1er@umbc4.umbc.edu>, berman@umbc.edu (Mike Berman) writes:
 
|> dag@control.lth.se (Dag Bruck) writes: 
|>
|> | I have received about 20 replies, all in favour.  Is there nobody in
|> | the Ada community that thinks that it is a useless feature?  It seems
|> | to rarely used for the simple reason that people rarely type big
|> | numbers.
|>
|> The use of embedded underscores in numeric literals is probably
|> statistically small, but the aid to understanding is invaluable.
   ...

Underscores are especially helpful in based constants, like
16#7fff_ffff# or 2#0010_1100_0001_0000# (especially for specifiying the
value to be placed in a control register in which each bit has a special
purpose).

--
Norman H. Cohen    ncohen@watson.ibm.com