=== relates to: S2148

=== on 29 Feb 2016, 19:21:31 Ann Campbell wrote:
\[~alban.auzeill] I've updated the message to be only for groups of 3 digits. I've never seen groups of 2 and 4 digits separated.

=== on 2 Mar 2016, 11:47:53 Alban Auzeill wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] Regarding decimal value, I've also never seen groups different from 3 digits

----
long decimal_value     = 5'543'124;
----
But regarding hexadecimal/octal/binary, the opposite was the truth. I've never seen groups from 3 digits.

Usually, for hexadecimal and octal it's 2 or 4 digits. And for binary it's 4 or 8 digits (but with 8 it is difficult to read, we should enforce a maximum of 4).

----
long hexadecimal_value = 0x83'A324'86E2;
long octal_value       = 04'4203'4331'3726;
long binary_value      = 0b0101'0110'1110'1010;
----

I'm changing the message and description accordingly.

=== on 2 Mar 2016, 14:06:07 Ann Campbell wrote:
Looks good [~alban.auzeill]

=== on 7 Mar 2016, 14:32:02 Alban Auzeill wrote:
\[~ann.campbell.2] I have changed this RSPEC and the RSPEC-3543 to split them differently:

* RSPEC-3542 Digit separators should be used
  Minor, promote good practice, doesn't ensure any grouping size just propose to use digit separators, not active by default because require {cpp}14 and could raises a lot of issues

* RSPEC-3543 Only standard grouping should be used with digit separators
  Critical, bug, active by default because only raises issue when digit separators are badly used, so implicitly only {cpp}14 projects will have issues. And it's not anymore "homogeneous grouping" but more generally "standard grouping".

=== on 7 Mar 2016, 15:27:36 Ann Campbell wrote:
Okay [~alban.auzeill]

