tahonermann added a comment. > I hope at least GCC will not implement this arbitrary restriction on math > symbols. I would argue a partial derivative symbol in C++ has more sense than > a skull emoji.
I am quite sure that gcc will also be implementing P1949 <https://reviews.llvm.org/P1949> as adopted for C++23. Thank you to Aaron and Steve for their excellent analysis and responses! @intractabilis, please note that this is not the end of the identifier story. A new Unicode work group recently started meeting as a result of the Trojan Source <https://trojansource.codes> reporting. Some members of that work group also maintain code bases that were negatively impacted by the changes in P1949 <https://reviews.llvm.org/P1949>. That group is expected to eventually produce guidance to better help language designers determine what should and should not be allowed in identifiers. The concerns are complicated; see Unicode UAX#31 <https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr31/>, UAX#36 <https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr36/>, and UAX#39 <https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr39/> for detailed analysis of most of the concerns. I think it is unlikely that WG21 or any of the major compiler implementors will deviate from P1949 <https://reviews.llvm.org/P1949> until new guidance emerges from the Unicode Technical Committee. With luck, that guidance will help to establish conventions that will be followed by most/all programming languages. But don't hold your breath; this will likely take quite a while. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D104975/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D104975 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
