<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><br><div>On Oct 1, 2017, at 22:01, Chris Lattner via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Oct 1, 2017, at 9:26 PM, Kenny Leung via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">Hi All.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I’d like to help as well. I have fun with operators.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There is also the issue of code security with invisible unicode characters and characters that look exactly alike.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></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>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></body></html>