Grapheme clusters, a.k.a.real characters

[Rick Johnson]

On Tuesday, July 18, 2017 at 7:35:13 PM UTC-5, Mikhail V wrote:
> ChrisA wrote:
> >On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:05 AM, Mikhail V <mikhailwas at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 2017-07-18, Steve D'Aprano <steve+python at pearwood.info> wrote:

> > > > _Neither system is right or wrong, or better than the
> > > > other._
> > >
> > > If that is said just "not to hurt anybody" then its ok.
> > > Though this statement is pretty absurd, not so many
> > > (intelligent) people will buy this out today.
> >
> > Let me give you one concrete example: [...]
>
> Ok, in this narrow context I can also agree. But in
> slightly wider context that phrase may sound almost like:
> "neither geometrical shape is better than the other as a
> basis for a wheel. If you have polygonal wheels, they are
> still called wheels."

All equilateral and equiangular polygons are approximations
of the wheel (or the circle, to be more general). Of course,
any "polygonal wheel" with a number of sides less than 6
would be very difficult to roll. 5 may be possible (to some
degree). However, 4 and 3 would be more useful as snowplows
than as "wheels". So the distinction between a wheel that is
either an "N-sided polygon" or a "true circle" becomes more
a matter of "levels of practicality" (both in usage _and_
manufacturing) than anything else. Of course -- and it goes
without saying, but this being python-list i feel compelled
to say it *wink* -- the perfect circle is the best wheel.