Updating D beyond Unicode 2.0

[Thomas Mader]

On Saturday, 22 September 2018 at 01:08:26 UTC, Neia Neutuladh 
wrote:
> ...you *do* know that not every codebase has people working on 
> it who only know English, right?

This topic boils down to diversity vs. productivity.

If supporting diversity in this case is questionable.

I work in a German speaking company and we have no developers who 
are not speaking German for now. In fact all are native speakers.
Still we write our code, comments and commit messages in English.
Even at university you learn that you should use English to code.

The reasoning is simple. You never know who will work on your 
code in the future.
If a company writes code in Chinese, they will have a hard time 
to expand the development of their codebase even though Chinese 
is spoken by that many people.

So even though you could use all sorts of characters, in a 
productive environment you better choose not to do so.
You might end up shooting yourself in the foot in the long run.

Diversity is important in other areas but I don't see much 
advantage here.
At least for now because the spoken languages of today don't 
differ tremendously in what they are capable of expressing.

This is also true for todays programming languages. Most of them 
are just different syntax for the very same ideas and concepts. 
That's not very helpful to bring people together and advance.

My understanding is that even life with it's great diversity just 
has one language (DNA) to define it.