Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?]

[Mark Lawrence]

On 21/07/2015 10:10, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Laura Creighton <lac at openend.se>:
>
>> In a message of Mon, 20 Jul 2015 20:30:48 -0700, Rustom Mody writes:
>>
>>> Can some unicode/Chinese literate person inform me whether that
>>> ideograph is equivalent to roman '9' or roman 'nine'?
>>
>> Ah, I don't understand you. What do you mean roman 'nine'? a phonetic
>> way of saying things? What bankers use to help prevent forgeries?
>> Something else?
>
> This is getting deep. It is an embarrassing metamathematical fact that
> numbers cannot be defined. At least, mathematicians gave up trying a
> century ago.
>
>     In mathematics, the essence of counting a set and finding a result n,
>     is that it establishes a one to one correspondence (or bijection) of
>     the set with the set of numbers {1, 2, ..., n}.
>     <URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counting#Counting_in_mathematics>
>
> Our ancestors defined the fingers (or digits) as "the set of numbers."
> Modern mathematicians have managed to enhance the definition
> quantitatively but not qualitatively.
>

Not all of them 
http://www.languagesandnumbers.com/how-to-count-in-paici/en/pri/

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence