Nick Coghlan writes: > We're not going to start second-guessing the Unicode Consortium on this > point - human languages are complicated, and we don't have any special > insight on this point that they don't.
Agreed. Python, however, is NOT a (natural) human language, and the Unicode Consortium definition of conformance does NOT prohibit subsetting appropriate to the purpose. We DO know more than the Unicode Consortium about Python. For example, I suspect that your catholic appetite for XID in identifiers does not apply to syntactic keywords or names of builtins. > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3131/#specification-of-language-changes > delegated this aspect of the language to them by way of the XID_Start and > the XID_Continue categories, and we're not going to change that. > The reference interpreter really isn't the place to experiment with > answering them - rather, they're more a question for opt-in code > analysis, I agree about experimentation. I'm not in a hurry, since I've only seen IDEOGRAPHIC SPACE and full-width ASCII break Python programs once or twice in the ten years I've been teaching my students to use it. Steve _______________________________________________ Python-ideas mailing list Python-ideas@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
