Thanks.

Denis.

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Axel Rauschmayer <axel at rauschma.de> wrote:

> According to 11.8.3, you'll get a syntax error – they won't even be
> parsed, because they are not syntactically legal.
>
>
> [[[Sent from a mobile device. Please forgive brevity and typos.]]]
>
> Dr. Axel Rauschmayer
> axel at rauschma.de
> http://rauschma.de
>
> On 15.10.2014, at 10:18, Den Tuzhik <dentuzhik at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Right, it was a typo. Consider `0xFW`.
>
> Nevertheless the question remains, what kind of error will such cases
> produce?
>
> Denis.
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 2:10 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.org> wrote:
>
>> Caitlin Potter wrote:
>>
>>> I’m not sure what the problem with `0xFE` is supposed to be, though?
>>>
>>
>> Right, 0xFE is a fine hex literal. One must remember all the punning uses
>> of hex: 0xFEEDFACE, 0xFEEDBABE, 0xCAFE, etc.
>>
>> /be
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20141015/51b7bddb/attachment.html>

Thanks.