Talk:Unicode variable names: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→Why!: confusion is rampant) |
(Language of compiler and interpreter are separate from the issue.) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
::Even for English speakers, ASCII has always been a compromise. Math symbols as mentioned; accented characters à la "café"; real quote marks; hyphens/dashes; currency marks, chapter marks, common symbols, ligatures, etc. We are no longer in the age where 64k memory is the norm and 640k ought to be big enough for everybody, so we really shouldn't keep ourselves in the narrow mindset of lower 7 bits. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 00:58, 7 July 2011 (UTC) |
::Even for English speakers, ASCII has always been a compromise. Math symbols as mentioned; accented characters à la "café"; real quote marks; hyphens/dashes; currency marks, chapter marks, common symbols, ligatures, etc. We are no longer in the age where 64k memory is the norm and 640k ought to be big enough for everybody, so we really shouldn't keep ourselves in the narrow mindset of lower 7 bits. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 00:58, 7 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::You do not need to speak English. You just need to speak the language of the of compiler or interpreter. You can still use produce Unicode programmatically, without the need to use non ascii source code. There are lots of arguments against Unicode in source code, but you will need to google for these. I am not going to go into all of these arguments here. One of the big problems was that the Egyptian and Thailand glyphs and some of the Chinese characters are not sufficiently different from each other to prevent confusion from readers that do not use these languages. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 16:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC) |
:::You do not need to speak English. You just need to speak the language of the of compiler or interpreter. You can still use produce Unicode programmatically, without the need to use non ascii source code. There are lots of arguments against Unicode in source code, but you will need to google for these. I am not going to go into all of these arguments here. One of the big problems was that the Egyptian and Thailand glyphs and some of the Chinese characters are not sufficiently different from each other to prevent confusion from readers that do not use these languages. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 16:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
::::All computer languages ignore some set of confused people. If we all ignored the same set of confused people, we could all use the same computer language. <tt>:-)</tt> |
::::All computer languages ignore some set of confused people. If we all ignored the same set of confused people, we could all use the same computer language. <tt>:-)</tt> --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] 16:55, 7 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
:::: "You just need to speak the language of the of compiler or interpreter." ... That's a matter of syntax and semantic, and ignores the areas of leniency that languages may offer, including variable and other symbol names. I'm certain that's leveraged around the world; we've had a couple cases where people came to RC, and needed to use translation tools to communicate to us. Their source languages wouldn't have been fully representable in ASCII, and one's native language used a Cyrillic alphabet. I don't know for certain, but I would assume that, in their case, new meaningful symbol names would not be easily and conveniently represented in ASCII. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 17:59, 7 July 2011 (UTC) |
|||