Hi,

In message "Re: \u escapes in string literals: proof of concept     implementation"
    on Thu, 8 Nov 2007 08:09:58 +0900, David Flanagan <david / davidflanagan.com> writes:

|> Anyway I have no plan to use \u nor \x{} for string representation.
|> It's only for literals, not backwards.
|
|Maybe I should have left \x{} in?

I don't think I follow the discussion how\x{} behave.  \x{1234} to be
code 1234 encoded in script encoding?  In case I am right, I slightly
feel we have to choose another letter than \x, if we need that feature.

							matz.