On 27/09/18 10:35, aliak wrote:
> Here's an example from this years spring semester and NTNU (norwegian uni): http://folk.ntnu.no/frh/grprog/eksempel/eks_20.cpp
> 
> ... That's the basic programming course. Whether the professor would use that I guess would depend on ratio of English/non-English speakers. But it's there nonetheless.

I'm sorry I keep bringing this up, but context is really important here.

The program you link to has non-ASCII in the comments and in the literals, but not in the identifiers. Nobody is opposed to having those.

Shachar

On 9/27/2018 12:35 AM, aliak wrote:
> Anyway, on a related note: D itself (not identifiers, but std) also supports unicode 6 or something. That's from 2010. That's a decade ago. We're at unicode 11 now. And I've already had someone tell me (while trying to get them to use D) - "hold on it supports unicode from a decade ago? Nah I'm not touching it". Not that it's the same as supporting identifiers in code, but still the reaction is relevant.

Nobody is suggesting D not support Unicode in strings, comments, and the standard library. Please file any issues on Bugzilla, and PRs to fix them.

On Thursday, 27 September 2018 at 08:16:00 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> On 27/09/18 10:35, aliak wrote:
>> Here's an example from this years spring semester and NTNU (norwegian uni): http://folk.ntnu.no/frh/grprog/eksempel/eks_20.cpp
>> 
>> ... That's the basic programming course. Whether the professor would use that I guess would depend on ratio of English/non-English speakers. But it's there nonetheless.
>
> I'm sorry I keep bringing this up, but context is really important here.
>
> The program you link to has non-ASCII in the comments and in the literals, but not in the identifiers. Nobody is opposed to having those.
>
> Shachar

The point was that being able to use non-English in code is demonstrably both helpful and useful to people. Norwegian happens to be easily anglicize-able. I've already linked to non ascii code versions in a previous post if you want that too.

On 27/09/18 16:38, aliak wrote:
> The point was that being able to use non-English in code is demonstrably both helpful and useful to people. Norwegian happens to be easily anglicize-able. I've already linked to non ascii code versions in a previous post if you want that too.

If you wish to make a point about something irrelevant to the discussion, that's fine. It is, however, irrelevant, mostly because it is uncontested.

This thread is about the use of non-English in *identifiers*. This thread is not about comments. It is not about literals (i.e. - strings). Only about identifiers (function names, variable names etc.).

If you have real world examples of those, that would be both interesting and relevant.

Shachar

On Thursday, 27 September 2018 at 07:03:51 UTC, Andrea Fontana wrote:
> On Thursday, 27 September 2018 at 05:15:01 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>> A delicious Turkish desert is "kabak tatlısı", made of squash. Now, it so happens that "kabak" also means "zucchini" in Turkish. Imagine my shock when I came across that desert recipe in English that used zucchini as the ingredient! :)
>>
>> Ali
>
> You can't even imagine how many italian words and recipes are distorted...
>
> Andrea

+1 :-P

On Thursday, 27 September 2018 at 13:59:48 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> On 27/09/18 16:38, aliak wrote:
>> The point was that being able to use non-English in code is demonstrably both helpful and useful to people. Norwegian happens to be easily anglicize-able. I've already linked to non ascii code versions in a previous post if you want that too.
>
> If you wish to make a point about something irrelevant to the discussion, that's fine. It is, however, irrelevant, mostly because it is uncontested.
>
> This thread is about the use of non-English in *identifiers*. This thread is not about comments. It is not about literals (i.e. - strings). Only about identifiers (function names, variable names etc.).
>
> If you have real world examples of those, that would be both interesting and relevant.
>
> Shachar

English doesn't mean ascii. You can write non-English in ascii, which you would've noticed if you'd opened the link, which had identifiers in Norwegian (which is not English).

And again, I've already posted a link that shows non-ascii identifiers. I'll paste it again here incase you don't want to read the thread:

https://speakerdeck.com/codelynx/programming-swift-in-japanese

On Thursday, 27 September 2018 at 16:34:37 UTC, aliak wrote:
> On Thursday, 27 September 2018 at 13:59:48 UTC, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
>> On 27/09/18 16:38, aliak wrote:
>>> The point was that being able to use non-English in code is demonstrably both helpful and useful to people. Norwegian happens to be easily anglicize-able. I've already linked to non ascii code versions in a previous post if you want that too.
>>
>> If you wish to make a point about something irrelevant to the discussion, that's fine. It is, however, irrelevant, mostly because it is uncontested.
>>
>> This thread is about the use of non-English in *identifiers*. This thread is not about comments. It is not about literals (i.e. - strings). Only about identifiers (function names, variable names etc.).
>>
>> If you have real world examples of those, that would be both interesting and relevant.
>>
>> Shachar
>
> English doesn't mean ascii. You can write non-English in ascii, which you would've noticed if you'd opened the link, which had identifiers in Norwegian (which is not English).
>
> And again, I've already posted a link that shows non-ascii identifiers. I'll paste it again here incase you don't want to read the thread:
>
> https://speakerdeck.com/codelynx/programming-swift-in-japanese

Shachar seems to be aiming for an internet high score by shooting down threads without reading them.  You have better things to do.
http://www.paulgraham.com/vb.html

On Friday, 28 September 2018 at 02:23:32 UTC, sarn wrote:
>
> Shachar seems to be aiming for an internet high score by shooting down threads without reading them.  You have better things to do.
> http://www.paulgraham.com/vb.html

I believe you're being too harsh. It's easy to miss a part of a post sometimes.

On Friday, 28 September 2018 at 11:37:10 UTC, Dukc wrote:
> It's easy to miss a part of a post sometimes.

That's very true, and it's always good to give people the benefit of the doubt.  But most people are able to post constructively here without

* Abrasively and condescendingly declaring others' posts to be completely pointless
* Doing that based on one single aspect of a post, without bothering to check the whole post or parent post
* Doubling down even after getting a hint that the poster might not have posted 100% cluelessly
* Doing all this more than once in a thread

If Shachar starts posting constructively, I'll happily engage.  I mean that.  Otherwise I won't waste my time, and I'll tell others not to waste theirs, too.

On 28/09/18 14:37, Dukc wrote:
> On Friday, 28 September 2018 at 02:23:32 UTC, sarn wrote:
>>
>> Shachar seems to be aiming for an internet high score by shooting down threads without reading them.  You have better things to do.
>> http://www.paulgraham.com/vb.html
> 
> I believe you're being too harsh. It's easy to miss a part of a post sometimes.

A minor correction: Aliak is not accusing me of missing a part of the post. He's accusing me of not taking into account something he said in a different part of the *thread*. I.e. - I missed something he said in one of the other (as of this writing, 98) posts of this thread, and thus causing Dukc to label me a bullshitter.