fix: octalLiteral from go-critic

[mmorel-35]

Description

Fixes octalLiteral rule from go-critic

Remove this section if you don't have related PRs.

Checklist

• I've read the guidelines for contributing to this repository.
• I've followed the conventions in the PR title.
• I've added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works.
• I've updated the documentation with the relevant information (if needed).
• I've added usage information (if the PR introduces new options)
• I've included a "before" and "after" example to the description (if the PR is a user interface change).

[knqyf263]

Thanks for your contribution.

As far as I know, since both 0755 and 0o755 compile to the exact same value in Go 1.13+, could you share your reasoning for preferring 0o? For example, is this driven by an updated style guideline or readability concerns? I’d love to understand the benefits so we can decide on a consistent convention for the project.

[mmorel-35]

To my understanding it is for more clarity.
See :

• https://tip.golang.org/doc/go1.13#language
• https://medium.com/@adamszpilewicz/octal-literals-insights-and-implementation-in-golang-2183db92de0f

This is recommended by go-critic and gofumpt, see "Octal integer literals should use the 0o prefix on modules using Go 1.13 and later" section

[knqyf263]

Thanks for explaining. Since C doesn't support 0o prefix, I've never felt like 0 prefix is less clear. However, I don't mind either 0o or 0. We can follow it as some linters recommend 0o.