On May 25, 2007, at 7:33 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >> Adding baroque command line options for users of other languages to >> do some useless verification at import time is not an acceptable >> answer. It'd be better to just reject the PEP entirely. > > Speaking of exaggeration ....
I am serious. I fully support python having unicode identifier support. But I believe it would be far worse for Python to have complicated identifier syntax configuration via command line options or auxilliary files than to stay restricted to ASCII. If the identifier syntax is changed to include unicode, all python modules are still usable everywhere. Once you start going down the road of configurable syntax (worse: globally configurable syntax), there will be a "second class" of python modules that won't work on some systems without extra pain. I'm listening to all these proposals for options, and it's just getting *worse and worse*. It started with a simple "-U", grew into a "-U <language>", grew into a 'pyidchar.txt' file with a list of character ranges, and now that pyidchar.txt file is going to have separate sections based on module name? Sorry, but are you [EMAIL PROTECTED] kidding me?!? James _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
