Can NFKC turn valid UAX 31 identifiers into non-identifiers?
Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
unicode at unicode.org
Thu Jun 7 08:47:21 CDT 2018
Got it, thanks.
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode <
unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 10:42:46 +0200
> Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
> > > The proposal also asks for identifiers to be treated as equivalent
> > > under
> > NFKC.
> > The guidance in #31 may not be clear. It is not to replace
> > identifiers as typed in by the user by their NFKC equivalent. It is
> > rather to internally *identify* two identifiers (as typed in by the
> > user) as being the same. For example, Pascal had case-insensitive
> > identifiers. That means someone could type in
> > myIdentifier = 3;
> > MyIdentifier = 4;
> > And both of those would be references to the same internal entity. So
> > cases like SARA AM doesn't necessarily play into this.
> There has been a suggestion to not just restrict identifiers to NFKC
> equivalence classes (UAX31-R4), but to actually restrict them to NFKC
> form (UAX31-R6). That is where the issue with SARA AM changes from a
> lurking issue to an active problem. Others have realised that NFC
> makes more sense than NFKC for Rust.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode