Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from January 2004
Damian Conway wrote: > Robin Berjon wrote: >> Picking the HTML entity names is better than the Unicode ones as the >> latter are way too long. They may not cover all the characters we >> need, but we can make up missing ones in a consistent fashion. > > I fear there are too many "missing ones" for that. > Any reason we couldn't accept both HTML and Unicode names? I wasn't proposing to come up with short names for all the Unicode repertoire, just for the characters that are used as operators :) That shouldn't be too long, should it? I have nothing against using the Unicode names for other entities for instance in POD. The reason I have some reserve on using those for entitised operators is that E<LEFT LOOKING TRIPLE WIGGLY LONG WUNDERBAR RIGHTWARDS, COMBINING> isn't very readable. Or rather, it's readable like a totally different plot with its own well-carved out characters, intrigues, and subplots in the middle of a book. -- Robin BerjonThread Previous | Thread Next