[swift-evolution] [Proposal] Refining Identifier and Operator Symbology

Matthew Johnson matthew at anandabits.com
Thu Oct 20 10:03:50 CDT 2016

> On Oct 20, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Jonathan S. Shapiro via swift-evolution <swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> Quick poll as a sanity check on a possible alternative for operators:
> If we admitted [:Sm:] and [:So:] and the traditional ASCII operator characters, would that cover the things that people currently feel passionate about? That would almost certainly be compliant with UAX31 once it settles, and I think it covers all of the cases people have raised here.
> Useful links if you want to check:
> [:Sm:]  Symbol, Math <http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/category/Sm/list.htm>
> [:So:]   Symbol, Other <http://www.fileformat.info/info/unicode/category/So/list.htm>
> Having looked it over, I'm concerned about including [:Sk:] in UAX31 operators, and I'm probably going to recommend in the UAX31 discussion that we shouldn't do so.

On a quick glance, I think this would be acceptable to me.

> Jonathan
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20161020/574d03d5/attachment.html>

More information about the swift-evolution mailing list