Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for Unicode versions of ?? and !! #6153

Closed
p6rt opened this issue Mar 15, 2017 · 7 comments
Closed

Add support for Unicode versions of ?? and !! #6153

p6rt opened this issue Mar 15, 2017 · 7 comments
Labels
RFC Request For Comments

Comments

@p6rt
Copy link

p6rt commented Mar 15, 2017

Migrated from rt.perl.org#131002 (status was 'rejected')

Searchable as RT131002$

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Mar 15, 2017

From @zoffixznet

Some people voiced interest in adding Unicode versions for the ternary operator and the two characters
below were briefly implemented​:

  U+2047 DOUBLE QUESTION MARK [Po] (⁇)
  U+203C DOUBLE EXCLAMATION MARK [Po] (‼)

Their introduction created an LTA error message[1] and they had some
rendering issues (such as ‼ rendering as an emoji[^2]; or being
really ugly in some fonts[^3]). It's also not entirely clear what the
proposed characters' actual intended use is and whether they're
an appropriate choice for the job and will be widely used by users.

In light of these concerns, it was decided we revert the addition of
these characters as an alternative ternary. I will include the
links to all the revert commits in a reply to this ticket shortly.

[1] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2017-03-14#i_14261780
[2] https://twitter.com/zoffix/status/841811442588385281
[3] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2017-03-15#i_14265206
[4] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2017-03-15#i_14265177

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Mar 15, 2017

From @zoffixznet

Rakudo​:
PR that added support​: rakudo/rakudo#1029
Revert commit​: rakudo/rakudo@9644fc360f

Roast​:
PR that added tests​: Raku/roast#246
Revert commit​: Raku/roast@b4d4df1e09

Docs​:
Issues on new ternary​: Raku/doc#1228
Commit that added to docs​: Raku/doc@e4d341bbc5
Revert commit​: Raku/doc@3bdf5329ed

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Mar 15, 2017

From @AlexDaniel

I think it should be noted that  ⁇‼ were pulled out not so much for reasons against them (text editors normally won't render them as emoji; font issue is not so much of an argument given that some fonts render them just fine), but because there were no good reasons to add them in the first place.

We have a place where unicode ops bake for a while before actually getting implemented​: https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/wiki/save-me-from-texas
I try to keep this page as sane as possible, but it is written with a little bit of open-mindedness for the brainstorming purpose.

Anyway, the page currently lists 4 reasons why a unicode version may be added. ⁇‼ horribly fail 3 of them. The only one left is that, *maybe*, it is hard or impossible to implement it in a module. But I'd argue that if this is a problem, we can find a way to make it easier, without adding ⁇‼ to the core. Looking at it again, perhaps this reason should be deleted altogether from the page…

So, in my opinion, whoever wants to have these back, please come up with good *reasons to add it*. I don't even know what these reasons could be. Are these characters used frequently? I doubt it. But if they are, any proof for it? And how are they used exactly? Anything else?

Don't get me wrong, I love unicode ops. And I was already using ⁇‼ the day it was implemented. But I agree with other folks that we should be at least a tiny bit conservative sometimes, especially when ops are added *just for fun*.

On 2017-03-15 06​:23​:09, cpan@​zoffix.com wrote​:

Some people voiced interest in adding Unicode versions for the ternary
operator and the two characters
below were briefly implemented​:

U+2047 DOUBLE QUESTION MARK [Po] (⁇)
U+203C DOUBLE EXCLAMATION MARK [Po] (‼)

Their introduction created an LTA error message[1] and they had some
rendering issues (such as ‼ rendering as an emoji[^2]; or being
really ugly in some fonts[^3]). It's also not entirely clear what the
proposed characters' actual intended use is and whether they're
an appropriate choice for the job and will be widely used by users.

In light of these concerns, it was decided we revert the addition of
these characters as an alternative ternary. I will include the
links to all the revert commits in a reply to this ticket shortly.

[1] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2017-03-14#i_14261780
[2] https://twitter.com/zoffix/status/841811442588385281
[3] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2017-03-15#i_14265206
[4] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2017-03-15#i_14265177

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Mar 15, 2017

The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Mar 15, 2017

From @zoffixznet

Per discussion[^1], closing this RFC due to current lack of interest in the feature.

[1] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2017-03-15#i_14269321

@p6rt p6rt closed this as completed Mar 15, 2017
@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Mar 15, 2017

@zoffixznet - Status changed from 'open' to 'rejected'

@p6rt
Copy link
Author

p6rt commented Mar 15, 2017

From @AlexDaniel

For anybody reading this ticket years later​: feel free to reopen if you have new information (or if you managed to come up with better reasoning than we did, or whatever…)

On 2017-03-15 08​:10​:53, cpan@​zoffix.com wrote​:

Per discussion[^1], closing this RFC due to current lack of interest
in the feature.

[1] https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6/2017-03-15#i_14269321

@p6rt p6rt added the RFC Request For Comments label Jan 5, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
RFC Request For Comments
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant