On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:15:11 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > > I dont think we are anywhere near making real suggestions for real changes > > which would need to talk of compatibility, portability, editor support > > and all such other good stuff. > > Just a bit of brainstorming to see how an alternative python would look > > like: > > Heres a quickly made list of symbols that may be nice to have support for > > × > > ÷ > > ≤ > > ≥ > > ∧ > > ∨ > > ¬ > > π > > λ > > ∈ > > ∉ > > ⊂ > > ⊃ > > ⊆ > > ⊇ > > ∅ > > ∩ > > ∪ > > ← > > … (ellipsis instead of range)
> Most of those look fine, but that's a fair bunch of characters you'd > need to type. And will you stop there? Would other symbols want to be > typable too? And if you have ellipsis (the character) would you also > support three consecutive U+002E to mean the same thing? (People > *will* type it that way, and would be extremely annoyed if it didn't > work.) > And will you turn Python into APL? Yes APL is a good example to learn mistakes from - being before its time/technology - taking a good idea too far - assuming that I understand clearly implies so do others - maybe some others As for ellipsis I guess its misguided [Was actually looking for 'center-ellipsis' which would not be so ambiguous] -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
