Oscar Campbell

Of that, the doctors aren't really sure, haha. It's been like that since I was a kid, every week or second week, I get this manic burst which completely denies...

So... the details. Since `0x` is base-prefix for hexadecimal, the amount of suffixes beginning with x would be limited. I think the best option _might_ be to simply forbid suffixes...

Yes. More details I forgot: For base-16 literal, I was thinking suffixes can only be used prefixed with double underscores. Since otherwise problems will arise for all suffixes beginning with...

Underscores are great for grouping digits: `0x_FFFF_FFF0_0000_0000` is easier to grasp than `0xFFFFFFF000000000`.

Yes `'` as an alternative for suffix-prefixing is a good idea. Apostrophes are currently used: - to explicitly denote a type annotation (in certain contexts, but _can_ always be used)...

The heavy part of it (expansion) is now implemented, including "crox"-syntax so it works in crystal macros too. Very alpha. The definitions are currently defined via the regular template syntax...

I will be going for the initial proposed syntax for defining suffixes now, but with full template-body syntax for greater versatility. If a specific literal kind (int-looking or real-looking) wants...

Number-literals without suffix are processed through the exact same expansion chain. ``` onyx a = 5 b = 3.1 ``` With user-defined default-suffixes and `using`-clause it could be used as:...

You sum it up well. Funny you bring up Haxe, that's an example of what to avoid _somwhat_, they've made a rather elaborate stdlib-on-top to abstract to multiple systems. But...

- Yeah, I have suffixes (_suffices?_) implemented in current Onyx with the syntax described in #77. The unwillingness in Crystal to include a `using` declarator was sad in that it...