From: Marco Cimarosti (marco.cimarosti@essetre.it)
Date: Mon Aug 25 2003 - 08:16:29 EDT
Peter Kirk wrote:
> But the other way round is less of a problem. So I am suggesting that
> for now we define all punctuation characters except for those with
> specifically defined operator functions, also all undefined
> characters, as giving a syntax error. This makes it possible
> to define additional punctuation characters, even those in so far
> undefined scripts like Tifinagh, as valid operators in future
> versions.
Yes, but this makes it impossible to use any as-yet undefined scripts in
identifiers! E.g., you'd never be able to write a variable name in Tifinagh
letters in future versions!
Unless you are still thinking at non-fixed sets, in which case I must remind
you again that there are no balls or door-keepers in a card game... :-)
Ciao.
Marco
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 25 2003 - 09:18:24 EDT