PEP 3131: Supporting Non-ASCII Identifiers

[Ben]

On May 15, 11:25 pm, Stefan Behnel <stefan.behnel-n05... at web.de>
wrote:
> René Fleschenberg wrote:
> > Javier Bezos schrieb:
> >>> But having, for example, things like open() from the stdlib in your code
> >>> and then öffnen() as a name for functions/methods written by yourself is
> >>> just plain silly. It makes the code inconsistent and ugly without
> >>> significantly improving the readability for someone who speaks German
> >>> but not English.
> >> Agreed. I always use English names (more or
> >> less :-)), but this is not the PEP is about.
>
> > We all know what the PEP is about (we can read). The point is: If we do
> > not *need* non-English/ASCII identifiers, we do not need the PEP. If the
> > PEP does not solve an actual *problem* and still introduces some
> > potential for *new* problems, it should be rejected. So far, the
> > "problem" seems to just not exist. The burden of proof is on those who
> > support the PEP.
>
> The main problem here seems to be proving the need of something to people who
> do not need it themselves. So, if a simple "but I need it because a, b, c" is
> not enough, what good is any further prove?
>
> Stefan

For what it's worth, I can only speak English (bad English schooling!)
and I'm definitely +1 on the PEP. Anyone using tools from the last 5
years can handle UTF-8

Cheers,
Ben