<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class="">IMO, the best argument against using unicode symbols for operators defined by mathematics is that they are currently difficult to type.</div></div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">And there is no realistic hope of that changing. This issue is so compelling that C and C++ introduced standardized text-ascii alternatives for the punctuation operators to relieve stress on non-english keyboard users.</div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>I don’t agree that there is no realistic hope of that changing. It appears to be pretty reasonable to anticipate that we’ll all be using software-driven keyboards that can display software-defined symbols on the keys in the relatively near future (probably 5 years, certainly 10). All kinds of interesting things become possible when that happens, including the ability to make unicode operators much easier to discover and type in a programmer’s editor.</div><br class=""></body></html>