> On Oct 19, 2016, at 7:41 AM, Matthew Johnson via swift-evolution > <[email protected]> wrote: > > I very much support the proposal to rationalize our handling of identifier > characters. > > I also support doing something similar for operator symbols. However, I > agree feedback from others that this proposal goes way to far in removing our > ability to use mathematical operators. > > If I’m reading the proposal and discussion properly, the group has not able > to reach consensus on the right criteria for operator symbols, but is hopeful > that will be possible after the Unicode Consortium completes its work. I > think it would be far better to defer the changes to valid operator symbols > until that time (removing only symbols which are currently treated as > operators but for which the proposal suggests should be available for > identifiers instead).
It's more practical to make breaking changes now and introduce the "right set" (that is, a standards-based set of mathematical operators) at a future date, than to justify keeping things as is and removing operators at a future date. -- E _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
