Indeed, I'd be thrilled to revise and reintroduce a proposal to update identifier and operator characters, if co-authors of that proposal are OK with it. Agree entirely with the principle you enunciate; that is exactly how we tried to approach it previously. I take it that you agree that a comprehensive revision of identifier characters cannot happen without thinking about operator characters, and vice versa, and I believe we came to that conclusion as well.<br><br>Two difficulties arose. Jonathan Shapiro indicated that the Unicode approach would invariably be to specify which characters are valid identifiers, etc. not by code points or planes but by "categories," for which there are none for operators but also for which there are problematic ones for emoji (the numerals 0-9 belong to the emoji category, for instance; there is another emoji_presentation category which has its own tricks). Therefore, we considered that the most conservative way to classify "definite operators," "definite identifiers," and everything else was to leave emoji out (UAX31 does not include them as identifier characters) and to roll back operator characters to the ASCII range. However, both temporary measures were soundly rejected.<br><br>There are a number of security issues to be ironed out with respect to emoji. For instance, emoji modifiers such as skin tones and genders allow different identifiers to be made that are visually identical or nearly so. (And yes, I'm aware that you or I could come up with an ad-hoc solution to this particular problem with emoji, but the issue is identifying all such relevant problems and coming up with solutions that jibe with future Unicode solutions to the same problems.) It would have been nice to leave this out entirely for now until further guidance from Unicode experts, but the community made it clear that emoji were a sine qua non.<br><br>Likewise, every discussion on operator characters thus far has devolved into a series of replies nominating specific characters for inclusion. I continue to believe a character-by-character debate on this mailing list would be exceptionally poor form. My point in replying to this thread is only that we don't need to get into any of this (Unicode operators, canonicalization forms, emoji, etc.--much as I would love to) in order to consider the isolated addition of an ASCII-range operator \. That idea seems very reasonable, independently useful, and limited in scope.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 15:28 Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">Although there was, as you say, some push-back against revamping our set of operator characters, there was also substantial push-forward. Many people want to resolve the problematic situation we currently have regarding the designation of operators and identifiers.<div class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></div><div class="gmail_msg">And indeed, cutting back to ASCII-only operators would have been an abominable choice. However waiting for the Unicode Consortium to draft guidelines for operator characters means prolonging our existing predicament. Additionally, in the discussion last fall it was mentioned that Unicode personnel are aware of what we are doing with Swift operators, and that our decisions may help to inform their classification of operator characters:</div><div class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></div><div class="gmail_msg"><span style="font-size:12.8px" class="gmail_msg">On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 5:38 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro </span><span dir="ltr" style="font-size:12.8px" class="gmail_msg"><<a href="mailto:jonathan.s.shapiro@gmail.com" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">jonathan.s.shapiro@gmail.com</a>></span><span style="font-size:12.8px" class="gmail_msg"> wrote:</span><br style="font-size:12.8px" class="gmail_msg"><blockquote class="gmail_quote gmail_msg" style="font-size:12.8px;margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_extra gmail_msg"></div></div></blockquote></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote gmail_msg" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">That's a feasible way to go, but keep in mind that the UAX31 changes are being co-designed with and informed by the current discussion. There are a bunch of things that have come up here that will allow UAX31 to side-step some "might have happened" mistakes, so this discussion has been very useful.<br class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg">The Swift community can and should make its own decision about whether to remain engaged. The risk of disengagement is that messy compatibility issues will probably have to be faced later that we can easily head-off now.</blockquote><div class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></div><div class="gmail_msg">Given all these considerations, I think the principled approach is for us to move forward with a 3-part categorization of characters into operators, identifiers, and unspecified (to be determined). That way we need not harangue ourselves over every controversial glyph, and may instead quickly determine those characters which should definitely be operators and those which should definitely be identifiers, while saving the difficult decisions until such time as Unicode produces recommendations and/or we decide to undertake a more comprehensive review.</div></div></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></div><div class="gmail_msg">Nevin</div><div class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"></div></div></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_extra gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_quote gmail_msg">On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Xiaodi Wu <span dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg"><<a href="mailto:xiaodi.wu@gmail.com" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">xiaodi.wu@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br class="gmail_msg"><blockquote class="gmail_quote gmail_msg" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">IIRC, where we left the discussion last time was that there was work not yet complete within Unicode on delineating identifier and operator characters. As there was broad agreement to align identifier characters with Unicode standards, and since the strict separation between identifiers and operators means that no character should belong to both, there was hesitation to declare an operator what Unicode may later deem to be an identifier.<br class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg">There was strenuous objection to temporarily cutting back operators to the ASCII range until Unicode completes its work, but also pushback in going character-by-character above the ASCII range.<br class="gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg">In any case, \ seems perfectly reasonable as an additional operator character that doesn't have to wait for Unicode.<div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-HOEnZb gmail_msg"><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-h5 gmail_msg"><br class="gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_quote gmail_msg"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_msg">On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 19:02 T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br class="gmail_msg"></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote gmail_msg" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">+1 from me. <div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">I hope that operators get more work soon, especially with regard to math.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_quote m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Nevin Brackett-Rozinsky via swift-evolution <span dir="ltr" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span> wrote:<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><blockquote class="gmail_quote m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">+1 as well. I also support adding these four symbols: <span style="font-size:12.8px" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">⅀ ؆ ؇ ⅋</span> as operators.<div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">There was substantial discussion last fall about revamping operators in Swift, with the primary goal of removing characters that should not be in the set. I went through the Unicode tables and compiled a list of 1,020 characters that I think definitely should be operators [<a href="http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/list-unicodeset.jsp?a=%5B%5B%3ASm%3A%5D%0D%0A%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DSuperscripts+And+Subscripts%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMiscellaneous+Technical%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DGeometric+Shapes%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMiscellaneous+Symbols%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DAlphabetic+Presentation+Forms%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DSmall+Form+Variants%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DHalfwidth+And+Fullwidth+Forms%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMathematical+Alphanumeric+Symbols%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DArabic+Mathematical+Alphabetic+Symbols%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DVariant+letterforms+and+symbols%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DLetterlike+symbol%7D%0D%0A%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DArrows%7D%0D%0A%5B%2F+%3D+%5C-+%2B+%21+*+%25+%3C+%3E+%5C%26+%7C+%5C%5E+~+%3F%5D%0D%0A%5B%C2%A1+%C2%A2+%C2%A3+%C2%A4+%C2%A5+%C2%A6+%C2%A7+%C2%A9+%C2%AB+%C2%AC+%C2%AE+%C2%B0+%C2%B1+%C2%B6+%C2%BB+%C2%BF%5D+-+%5B%C2%A2+%C2%A3+%C2%A4+%C2%A5+%C2%A9+%C2%AE%5D%0D%0A%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DGeneral+punctuation%7D+-+%5BU%2B203F+U%2B2040+U%2B2045+U%2B2046+U%2B2054%5D%0D%0A%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DDouble+punctuation+for+vertical+text%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DArchaic+punctuation%7D+-+%5BU%2B2E31+U%2B2E33+U%2B2E34+U%2B2E3F%5D%0D%0AU%2B214B%5D&g=&i=" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">list of operator characters</a>]</div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">The effect of that would be to make 1,628 characters no longer usable as operators [<a href="http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/list-unicodeset.jsp?a=%5B%2F+%3D+%5C-+%2B+%21+*+%25+%3C+%3E+%5C%26+%7C+%5C%5E+~+%3F%0D%0AU%2B00A1+-+U%2B00A7%0D%0AU%2B00A9+U%2B00AB+U%2B00AC+U%2B00AE%0D%0AU%2B00B0+-+U%2B00B1%0D%0AU%2B00B6+U%2B00BB+U%2B00BF+U%2B00D7+U%2B00F7%0D%0AU%2B2016+-+U%2B2017%0D%0AU%2B2020+-+U%2B2027%0D%0AU%2B2030+-+U%2B203E%0D%0AU%2B2041+-+U%2B2053%0D%0AU%2B2055+-+U%2B205E%0D%0AU%2B2190+-+U%2B23FF%0D%0AU%2B2500+-+U%2B2775%0D%0AU%2B2794+-+U%2B2BFF%0D%0AU%2B2E00+-+U%2B2E7F%0D%0AU%2B3001+-+U%2B3003%0D%0AU%2B3008+-+U%2B3030%5D%0D%0A%0D%0A-%5B%5B%3ASm%3A%5D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DSuperscripts+And+Subscripts%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMiscellaneous+Technical%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DGeometric+Shapes%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMiscellaneous+Symbols%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DAlphabetic+Presentation+Forms%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DSmall+Form+Variants%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DHalfwidth+And+Fullwidth+Forms%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMathematical+Alphanumeric+Symbols%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7BBlock%3DArabic+Mathematical+Alphabetic+Symbols%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DVariant+letterforms+and+symbols%7D%0D%0A-%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DLetterlike+symbol%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DArrows%7D%0D%0A%5B%2F+%3D+%5C-+%2B+%21+*+%25+%3C+%3E+%5C%26+%7C+%5C%5E+~+%3F%5D%0D%0A%5B%C2%A1+%C2%A2+%C2%A3+%C2%A4+%C2%A5+%C2%A6+%C2%A7+%C2%A9+%C2%AB+%C2%AC+%C2%AE+%C2%B0+%C2%B1+%C2%B6+%C2%BB+%C2%BF%5D+-+%5B%C2%A2+%C2%A3+%C2%A4+%C2%A5+%C2%A9+%C2%AE%5D%0D%0A%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DGeneral+punctuation%7D+-+%5BU%2B203F+U%2B2040+U%2B2045+U%2B2046+U%2B2054%5D%0D%0A%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DDouble+punctuation+for+vertical+text%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7Bsubhead%3DArchaic+punctuation%7D+-+%5BU%2B2E31+U%2B2E33+U%2B2E34+U%2B2E3F%5D%0D%0AU%2B214B%5D&g=&i=" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">list of non-operator characters</a>]</div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">However, my strategy was to be conservative in accepting operators. There are several Unicode blocks which contain some additional characters which we may want to have as operators [<a href="http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/list-unicodeset.jsp?a=%5B%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMiscellaneous+Technical%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DOptical+Character+Recognition%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DBox+Drawing%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DBlock+Elements%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DGeometric+Shapes%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMiscellaneous+Symbols%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DDingbats%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DBraille%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMiscellaneous+Symbols+And+Arrows%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DYijing+Hexagram+Symbols%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMusical+Symbols%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DAncient+Greek+Musical+Notation%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DTai+Xuan+Jing+Symbols%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DMahjong+Tiles%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DDomino+Tiles%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DPlaying+Cards%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DOrnamental+Dingbats%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DAlchemical+Symbols%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DGeometric+Shapes+Extended%7D%0D%0A%5Cp%7BBlock%3DSupplemental+Arrows+C%7D%5D%0D%0A&g=&i=" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">list of characters in those blocks</a>]</div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">I did not include the backslash because I decided not to mess with the choice of ASCII operators, however I do support making backslash an operator. I am not sure about currency symbols.</div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">Nevin</div><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667m_7905769738546608409h5 m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_extra m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><div class="gmail_quote m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">On Sun, Feb 5, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution <span dir="ltr" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span> wrote:<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><blockquote class="gmail_quote m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667m_7905769738546608409m_-5874055934264812268gmail- m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
on Sun Feb 05 2017, Nicolas Fezans <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> Dear all,<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> This is a rather simple proposal to add '\' (backslash character) as a<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> valid operator-head in the swift grammar.<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> One argument for it, is that there exist a backslash operator in the<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> MATLAB/Scilab/Octave languages. In this languages A\B solves the linear<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> system A*X = B for X (or the least square problem associated to it if the<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> system of equations is overdetermined). I am doing some numerical<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> computation in Swift and it would be nice to be able to declare the same<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> operator name for this functionality.<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> I might have missed some arguments for not adding them, but I seems to me<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> that until now the \ character is only used inside of string literals. If<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> that is the case, both uses should never generate a conflict or be<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> ambiguous, isn't it? (String literals keep their interpretation of \ and \<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> used otherwise within the swift code will be interpreted as an operator or<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> as the beginning of an operator)<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
> I am curious to see what will be the feedback on this.<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
</span>+1 if it doesn't clash with the grammar.<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<span class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667m_7905769738546608409m_-5874055934264812268gmail-HOEnZb m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><font color="#888888" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
--<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
-Dave<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
</font></span><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667m_7905769738546608409m_-5874055934264812268gmail-HOEnZb m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><div class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667m_7905769738546608409m_-5874055934264812268gmail-h5 m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
_______________________________________________<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
swift-evolution mailing list<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
</div></div></blockquote></div><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></div></div></div></div></div>
<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">_______________________________________________<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
swift-evolution mailing list<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></blockquote></div><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg"></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
swift-evolution mailing list<br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class="m_-5585222714305885894gmail-m_776308301254735667gmail_msg gmail_msg">
</blockquote></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br class="gmail_msg"></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="gmail_msg">
swift-evolution mailing list<br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class="gmail_msg">
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" class="gmail_msg" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br class="gmail_msg">
</blockquote></div>