On Mon, 02 Jan 2017 14:15:45 -0800, alex.jakime...@gmail.com wrote: > On 2017-01-02 13:51:27, comdog wrote: > > If it's going to be rejected, a note about why Perl 6 will not have > > full, basic Unicode support (Level 1) would be nice. > > > > > I'm not sure I understand the issue here… > It does support properties, and you can already use + and - (and | was > supposed > to be an equivalent to + I think, so just use + instead). > > So if you want something like <:Ll + :N>, then it already works. Now, > the only > question is how would you do intersections, in which case you can use > something > like this: > > say ‘pyõrl6’ ~~ m/[<:Ll> & <:Block(‘Basic Latin’)>]+/ # OUTPUT«｢py｣» > > > I don't mind & being added, as much as I don't mind it being rejected. > But I > don't really see the point about basic unicode support (or the lack of > thereof). Perhaps you can clarify?
To be clear, my "doubt they'll be implemented soon" wasn't an indication they shouldn't be, just that it's better that the docs cover things that actually exist. If somebody popped up with a patch to implement them tomorrow, that'd be just great. But, as mentioned by Alex, there is already a way to do it, and at the moment most folks are more focused on making the many features we already have robust and fast rather than adding more features. Thus my uncertainty whether it'll top anybody's todo list especially soon. Of course, now I've written this somebody will probably be like "hah, challenge accepted!" :-) I'll re-title this ticket to be an NYI for the features; it's right that we have a ticket to track that it wants doing at some point. /jnthn
