An assessment of the Unicode standard

Christopher Culver crculver at christopherculver.com
Tue Sep 15 18:22:30 CEST 2009


Hendrik van Rooyen <hendrik at microcorp.co.za> writes:
> 2) Is about as useful as stating that any Turing complete language and 
> processor pair is capable of solving any computable problem, given enough 
> time. So why are we not all programming in brainfuck?

Except the amount of circumlocution one language might happen to use
over another is quite limited.

> Or speaking the language of the people who wrote linear B?

You mean Mycenaean Greek? There's still a few million people in Europe
who speak a descendent of that very language.

> When a language lacks a word for a concept like "window", then (I 
> believe  :-) ), it kind of puts a crimp in the style of thinking that a 
> person will do, growing up with only that language.

"Window" goes back to an Anglo-Saxon compound "windeye". Even if a
word does not already exist in a given language for whatever novel
item, the language is capable of creating from its own resources.



More information about the Python-list mailing list