[Python-Dev] a slightly more coherent case

[Ken Manheimer]

On Tue, 4 Apr 2000, Fred L. Drake, Jr. wrote:

> gvwilson@nevex.com writes:
>  > 1. If P3K source is allowed to be Unicode, then all Python programming
>  >    systems (custom-made or pre-existing) are going to have to be able
>  >    to handle more than just 1970s-vintage 7-bit ASCII.  If that support
>  >    has to be there, it seems a shame not to make use of it in the language
>  >    itself where that would be helpful. [1,2]
> [...]
>   As I indicated above, I don't think the specific runes are the
> problem (outside of programmer alienation).  The *biggest* problem
> (IMO) is that the runes are not on our keyboards.  This has nothing to
> do with the appropriateness of the runes to the semantic meanings
> bound to them in the language definition, this has to do convenience
> for typing without any regard to cultured habits in the current
> programmer population.

In general, it seems that there are some places where a programming
language implementation should not be on the leading edge, and this is
one.  I think we'd have to be very confident that this new division sign
(or whatever) is going to be in ubiquitous use, on everyone's keyboard,
etc, before we could even consider making it a necessary part of the
standard language.  Do you have that confidence?

Ken Manheimer
klm@digicool.com