Swift

[J. Leslie Turriff]

On Thursday 05 June 2014 06:10:42 Frédéric Grosshans wrote:
> Le 05/06/2014 12:52, David Starner a écrit :
> > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 3:04 AM, J. Leslie Turriff
> >
> > <jlturriff at centurylink.net> wrote:
> >>          What I find interesting is that (with the possible exception of
> >> Ada) I don't think that any of the commonly used languages allow for the
> >> use of Unicode characters for non- user-defined tokens (i.e. reserved
> >> words, etc.).
> >
> > There is one non-ASCII character in the library, for Pi, and that
> > caused some fuss, along with some eye-rolling, as writing the Unicode
> > characters as ["03C0"] is permitted. Ada is a conservative language,
> > and there's no real drive to make changes like these. (I was mistaken
> > on the 20 years for Unicode identifiers; it was the Ada 2005 standard
> > that permitted it, not Ada 95.)
> >
> > Scala is not really  a commonly used language, but does use some
> > Unicode arrows: ⇒  for =>, ←for <- and → for ->. Most people don't
> > bother.
> >
> > ALGOL 60 and ALGOL 68 used non-ASCII characters like ×, ÷, ≤, ≥, ≠, ¬,
> > ∨, ∧, ⊂, ≡, ␣ and ⏨, and had compiler defined spellings for keywords.
>
> And, of course, there is APL (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_%28programming_language%29 ). Unicode
> has 70 characters specially for its use (APL FUNCTIONAL SYMBOL ****),
> U+2336 to U+237A since Unicode 1.1 and U+2395 since Unicode 3.0
	All true; but do any languages allow for keywords (if, then, else, do, while, 
until, end, iterate, leave, call return, exit,...) to be expressed in the 
programmer's locale?
-- 
"Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be 
slaves." --Henry David Thoreau