[issue22667] Incorrect evaluation of variables with names containing supplementary characters

2014-10-22 Thread Drekin
Drekin added the comment: I understand. I have found https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-May/007995.html as a reason for using NFKC rather than NFC. On the other hand I think one may want these double-struct mathematical letters to be different from the ordinary ones if used

[issue22667] Incorrect evaluation of variables with names containing supplementary characters

2014-10-22 Thread STINNER Victor
STINNER Victor added the comment: So I wonder if there are some other reasons for choosing NFKC over NFC. In fact, there is a whole PEP: http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3131/ I see Which normalization form should be used, NFC or NFKC? without answer, sorry. I guess that NFKC avoids

[issue22667] Incorrect evaluation of variables with names containing supplementary characters

2014-10-22 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Benjamin Peterson added the comment: The unicode standard explains some of the tradeoffs. http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr31/tr31-21.html#normalization_and_case On Wed, Oct 22, 2014, at 07:42, Drekin wrote: Drekin added the comment: I understand. I have found

[issue22667] Incorrect evaluation of variables with names containing supplementary characters

2014-10-18 Thread Drekin
New submission from Drekin: eval(\N{mathematical double-struck capital a}) NameError: name 'A' is not defined A = 2 eval(\N{mathematical double-struck capital a}) 2 \N{mathematical double-struck capital a} == A False -- components: Interpreter Core, Unicode messages: 229653 nosy:

[issue22667] Incorrect evaluation of variables with names containing supplementary characters

2014-10-18 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Benjamin Peterson added the comment: Identifier names are normalized. unicodedata.normalize(NFKC, \N{mathematical double-struck capital a}) == A True -- nosy: +benjamin.peterson resolution: - not a bug status: open - closed ___ Python tracker