Unicode [was Re: Cult-like behaviour]

[Jim Lee]

On 07/16/18 03:39, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Good for you.
>
> But Python is not a programming language written to satisfy the needs of
> people like you, and ONLY people like you.
>
> It is a language written to satisfy the needs of people from Uzbekistan,
> and China, and Japan, and India, and Brazil, and France, and Russia, and
> Australia, and the UK, and mathematicians, and historians, and linguists,
> and, yes, even people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for
> Jesus, the whole world ought to be using it.
>
>
>> When I create a one-time use program to visualize some data on a
>> graph, I don't care if anyone else can read the axis labels but me.
>> These are realities.  A good programming language will allow for these
>> realities without putting the burden on the programmer to turn *every*
>> program into a politically correct, globalization compliant model of
>> modern groupthink.
> And here we get to the crux of the matter. It isn't really the technical
> issues of Unicode that annoy you. It is the loss of privilege that you,
> as an ASCII user, no longer get to dismiss 90% of the world as beneath
> your notice.
>
> Nice.
>

90% of the world *is* "beneath my notice" when it comes to programming 
for myself.   I really don't care if that's not PC enough for you.

Had you actually read my words with *intent* rather than *reaction*, you 
would notice that I suggested the *option* of turning off Unicode.  I 
didn't say get *rid* of Unicode.  I didn't say make it *harder* to use 
Unicode.  Once again - reaction rather than reading.

Obviously, the most vocal representatives of the Python community are 
too sensitive about their language to enable rational discussion.


-Jim