Steve Howell wrote:
> Current Python has the precedence that color/colour
> are treated as two separate identifers,
But there's always a clear visual difference between
"color" and "colour", and your editor is not going
to turn one into the other while you're not looking
(unless you've got some so
On 6/6/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think "obvious" referred to the reasoning, not the outcome.
> > I can tell that the decision was "NFC, anything goes", but I don't see why.
> I think I'm repeating myself: Because UAX 31 says so. That's it. There
> is a standard that e
On 6/5/07, Steve Howell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Ideally, either that equivalence would also include
> > compatibility, or
> > else characters whose compatibility and canonical
> > equivalents are
> > different would be banned for use in identifi
Steve Howell writes:
> So I'm +1 on the unquoted third option, that canonically
> equivalent, but differently encoded, Unicode characters are allowed
> yet treated as different.
>
> Am I stretching the analogy too far?
Yes. By definition, that is nonconformant to the standard.
Canonically
> I think "obvious" referred to the reasoning, not the outcome.
>
> I can tell that the decision was "NFC, anything goes", but I don't see why.
I think I'm repeating myself: Because UAX 31 says so. That's it. There
is a standard that experts in the domain have specified, and PEP 3131
follows it.
--- Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ideally, either that equivalence would also include
> compatibility, or
> else characters whose compatibility and canonical
> equivalents are
> different would be banned for use in identifiers.
>
Current Python has the precedence that color/colour
a
--- Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > B. Should the default behaviour accept only
> ASCII identifiers, or
> > >should it accept identifiers containing
> non-ASCII characters?
> >
> > Added as an open issue.
> [...]
Martin, I hope you close out this issue, and just make
a firm,
On 6/5/07, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > G. Should source code be required to be in normalized
> > > form?
...
> To your earlier question of "what about non-UTF-8 files", I
> imagine that the normalization restriction would apply to the
> decoded characters. That is, once you know
> > A. Should identifiers be allowed to contain any Unicode letter?
>
> Not an open issue; the PEP has been accepted.
The items listed under "A." are concerns that I wanted to be noted
in the PEP, so thanks for listing them.
> > B. Should the default behaviour accept only ASCII identifiers, or
>
On 6/5/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >1. Python will lose the ability to make a reliable round trip to
> > a human-readable display on screen or on paper.
> Correct. Was already the case, though, because of comments
> and string literals.
But these are usually less
> Here's a summary of some of the remaining open issues and unaddressed
> arguments regarding PEP 3131. These are the ones I'm familiar with,
> so I don't claim this to be complete. I hope it helps give some
> perspective on this huge thread, though.
Thanks, I added them all to the PEP. Not sure
On 6/5/07, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I haven't heard anyone whose native language is RTL
> > lobbying for support of their language.
...
> I don't believe I've read anything saying "since bidi is hard,
> lets not do unicode at all".
Not in
> 1) My first proposal is that someone - one of the PEP 3131 advocates
> probably - create a set of patches, or possibly a branch, that
> implements unicode identifiers in whatever manner they think is
> appropriate. Write some actual code instead of just talking about it.
I'm working on that.
Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In other words - instead of endless discussions of hypotheticals, let
> people vote with their feet. Because I can already tell that as far as
> this mailing list goes, there will never be a consensus on this issue,
> due to basic value differences.
If the un
On 6/5/07, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks so much for this excellent roundup from the RoundUp Master :)
> Seriously, I've been staying well away from the PEP 3131 threads, and I
> was hoping that someone would post a summary of the issues so I could
> catch up.
I agree that the roundup
Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's a summary of some of the remaining open issues and unaddressed
> arguments regarding PEP 3131. These are the ones I'm familiar with,
> so I don't claim this to be complete. I hope it helps give some
> perspective on this huge thread, though.
Thanks so much fo
Hi,
Here's a summary of some of the remaining open issues and unaddressed
arguments regarding PEP 3131. These are the ones I'm familiar with,
so I don't claim this to be complete. I hope it helps give some
perspective on this huge thread, though.
A. Should identifiers be allowed to contain any
17 matches
Mail list logo
