On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Sven R. Kunze <srkunze@mail.de> wrote:
On 14.07.2016 08:39, David Mertz wrote:
That is, and should remain, a matter of tooling not core language (I don't want https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ColorForth for Python).

Very good point. That now is basically the core argument against it at least for me. So, -100 on the proposal from me. :)

+1. Editor's job, neither CPython's interpreter nor core grammar.

On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 9:28 PM, Alexander Belopolsky <alexander.belopolsky@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jul 13, 2016, at 4:12 PM, John Wong <gokoproject@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry to be blunt. Are we going to add omega, delta, psilon and the entire Greek alphabet?

Breaking news: the entire Greek alphabet is already available for use in Python. If someone wants to write code that looks like a series of missing character boxes on your screen she already can.

You misunderstood my point. I was referring to identifier, what the proposal is asking. Of course unicode is availalble, people always argue about unicode, who wouldn't know Python doesn't support unicode.

Why should I write pi in two English characters instead of typing π? Python is so popular among the science community, so shouldn't we add that as well? Excerpt from the question on http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/16010/is-it-bad-to-use-unicode-characters-in-variable-names:

t = (µw-µl)/c  # those are used in
e = ε/c        # multiple places.
σw_new = (σw**2 * (1 - (σw**2)/(c**2)*Wwin(t, e)) + γ**2)**.5
If we were to vote on popularity, we'd look at comparing the size of functional programmers vs scientists. Not saying functional programmers don't matter (already stressed this in my previous comment), but this is more like an editor plugin. I personally would love to see such in VIM.