From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC, SUBJECT_NEEDS_ENCODING,SUBJ_ILLEGAL_CHARS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,8ea33c39efc56ac3 X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,UTF8 Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: sharp � and ss in Ada keywords like ACCESS Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:43:33 +0200 Organization: cbb software GmbH Message-ID: <1jwwodd91xfc8$.1xbuqt6j4xh5$.dlg@40tude.net> References: <4e931db5$0$6541$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <1f9a5099-f5f5-49a8-8773-b7eaca771427@s5g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <4e93381d$0$6545$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <1aopal79s1esa$.dabl84c55g4l$.dlg@40tude.net> <1hvfz4aex1o6a$.1hibv8s1wdzy9.dlg@40tude.net> Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de NNTP-Posting-Host: FbOMkhMtVLVmu7IwBnt1tw.user.speranza.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:21387 Date: 2011-10-12T09:43:33+02:00 List-Id: On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:32:35 -0500, Randy Brukardt wrote: > I believe (but haven't checked carefully), that Unicode case folding never > treats Cyrillic and Latin characters as the same (even when it could). That is for sure, they are different code points. > So this problem would not come up in Ada. Depends on what is considered problematic. ß is not ss and for that matter, it is not β (beta). Their capital letters, if exist (ß does not have capital case) are different. If Ada wished to introduce some rules of equivalence for Central European languages, like ß=ss, ä=ae, ö=oe, and Eastern European languages, like a=а, ё=e, and who knows what rules in other languages exist, that would be hopeless. But without them, the programmer could have *all* Ada keywords as identifiers, by replacing appropriate Latin letters with Cyrillic ones. Furthermore, identifiers looking perfectly same will be different and there is a huge number of homonyms of practically *each* reasonable identifier. I see it in breach with basic Ada design. Since it likely just to stay so, there seems to me absolutely no reason to keep any reserved keywords in such a language. I would drop them, and finally be able to declare something "Range". -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de