develooper Front page | perl.perl6.language | Postings from February 2004

Re: Semantics of vector operations

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Larry Wall
February 2, 2004 11:18
Re: Semantics of vector operations
Message ID:
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 01:14:48PM -0500, John Macdonald wrote:
: On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 09:59:50AM +0000, Simon Cozens wrote:
: > (Andy Wardley) writes:
: > > Sure, make Perl Unicode compliant, right down to variable and operator 
: > > names.  But don't make people spend an afternoon messing around with mutt, 
: > > vim, emacs and all the other tools they use, just so that they can read, 
: > > write, email and print Perl programs correctly.
: > 
: > To be honest, I don't think that'll be a problem, but only because by the
: > time Perl 6 is widely deployed, people will have got themselves sorted out
: > as far as Unicode's concerned. I suspect similar things were said when C
: > decided to use 7 bit characters.
: Don't be so sure.  I've been seeing the << and >>
: characters properly sometimes, as ??? sometimes,
: and I think there were some other variants (maybe for
: other extended characters) - depending upon whether
: I'm reading the messages locally at home or remotely
: through a terminal emulator.  Those emulators are
: not about to be replaced for any other reason in the
: near future.

Well, sure.  But what we're trying to optimize here is specifically
not the near future.

: I'll be able to work it out if I have to, but it'll
: be an annoyance, and probably one that shows up
: many times with different bits of software, and
: often those bits will not be under my control and
: will have to be worked around rather than "fixed".
: (In the canine-ical sense, it is the current software
: that is "fixed", i.e.  it has limited functionality.)
: > That doesn't mean I think Unicode operators are a good idea, of course.
: They will cause problems for sure.

No question about that.  But Unicode is addressing (or attempting
to address) a basic unreducable complexity of the world, and I'm not
willing to sweep that complexity under someone else's carpet for
the purposes of short-term anaesthesia.  I expect that over the long
term people will learn to use Unicode in moderation, after a short
period of (over)exuberant experimentation.

As a temporary measure (where temporary is measured in years), I'd
suggest Unicode declarations include an C<is ASCII('!@#$')> trait.


Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About