On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 08:05:40AM +0200, Mikhail V wrote:
Any critics on it? Besides not following the unicode consortium.
Besides the other remarks on "tradition", I think this is where a big problem lies: We should not deviate from a common standard (without very good cause).
There are cases where a language does good by deviating from the common standard. There are also cases where it is bad to deviate.
Almost all current programming languages understand unicode, for instance:
and that were only the first 3 I tried. They all use `\u` followed by 4 hexadecimal digits.
You may not like the current standard. You may think/know/... it to be suboptimal for human comprehension. However, what you are suggesting is a very costly change. A change where --- I believe --- Python should not take the lead, but also should not be afraid to follow if other programming languages start to change.
I would suggest that this is a change that might be best proposed to the unicode consortium itself, instead of going to (just) a programming language.
It'd be interesting to see whether or not you can convince the unicode consortium that 8 symbols will be enough.