Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?)

[Rustom Mody]

On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:15:11 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > I dont think we are anywhere near making real suggestions for real changes
> > which would need to talk of compatibility, portability, editor support
> > and all such other good stuff.
> > Just a bit of brainstorming to see how an alternative python would look like:
> > Heres a quickly made list of symbols that may be nice to have support for
> > ×
> > ÷
> > ≤
> > ≥
> > ∧
> > ∨
> > ¬
> > π
> > λ
> > ∈
> > ∉
> > ⊂
> > ⊃
> > ⊆
> > ⊇
> > ∅
> > ∩
> > ∪
> > ←
> > … (ellipsis instead of range)

> Most of those look fine, but that's a fair bunch of characters you'd
> need to type. And will you stop there? Would other symbols want to be
> typable too? And if you have ellipsis (the character) would you also
> support three consecutive U+002E to mean the same thing? (People
> *will* type it that way, and would be extremely annoyed if it didn't
> work.)

> And will you turn Python into APL?

Yes APL is a good example to learn mistakes from
- being before its time/technology
- taking a good idea too far
- assuming that I understand clearly implies so do others
- maybe some others

As for ellipsis I guess its misguided
[Was actually looking for 'center-ellipsis' which would not be so ambiguous]