[Python-3000] PEP 3131 - the details

tomer filiba tomerfiliba at gmail.com
Mon May 21 12:03:50 CEST 2007

[Martin v. Löwis]
> > So, maybe it's better to keep the status quo, and not allow Cf
> > characters, unless someone comes up with a particular need for doing so.
> > Hm, I think I've convinced myself of that now. :)
> That is my reasoning, too. People seem to want to be conservative,
> so it's safer to reject formatting characters for the moment.
> If people come up with a need, they still can be added.
> (there might be a need for it in RTL languages, supporting
> 200E..200F and 202A..202E, but it seems that speakers of RTL
> languages are skeptical about the entire PEP, so it's unclear
> whether allowing these would help anything)

i thought of simply treating Cf chars as whitespace -- i.e., they
are allowed BETWEEN identifiers, but not INSIDE of them.

but then again, what if i wanted identifiers in more than one language
or direction? that may seem pointless, but i can give concrete
examples of usage -- the cardinal numbers (aleph one and friends):

without the LTR marker, it would read one-aleph, which also *looks* like
an invalid indentifier, because it begins with a number (although it doesn't).
the point is -- you must allow such markers to appear inside tokens.

allowing me to use greek symbols in equations, but NOT allowing me
to use hebrew ones, is just wrong. either you allow latin-only, or you
allow every character supported by unicode. there's no justification
for compromises, as the motivation of the PEP is localization, and
you can't discriminate one locale from another.

it's getting complicated. that's why i was against it from the very start.
i mean, i wouldn't mind having it, but being familiar with RTL languages,
i know how complex it is.


More information about the Python-3000 mailing list