What is your use case for this?<br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 10:56 David Sweeris 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="auto"><br><div>On Oct 1, 2017, at 22:01, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Oct 1, 2017, at 9:26 PM, Kenny Leung via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="m_8138847825612054131Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div style="word-wrap:break-word"><div>Hi All.</div><div><br></div><div>I’d like to help as well. I have fun with operators.</div><div><br></div><div>There is also the issue of code security with invisible unicode characters and characters that look exactly alike.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Unless there is a compelling reason to add them, I think we should ban invisible characters. What is the harm of characters that look alike?</div></div></blockquote><br></div><div dir="auto"><div>Especially if people want to use the character in question as both an identifier and an operator: We can make the character an identifier and its lookalike an operator (or the other way around).</div><div><br></div><div>- Dave Sweeris</div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
swift-evolution mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution</a><br>
</blockquote></div>