Updating D beyond Unicode 2.0

[aliak]

On Friday, 21 September 2018 at 20:25:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> When I originally started with D, I thought non-ASCII 
> identifiers with Unicode was a good idea. I've since slowly 
> become less and less enthusiastic about it.
>
> First off, D source text simply must (and does) fully support 
> Unicode in comments, characters, and string literals. That's 
> not an issue.
>
> But identifiers? I haven't seen hardly any use of non-ascii 
> identifiers in C, C++, or D. In fact, I've seen zero use of it 
> outside of test cases. I don't see much point in expanding the 
> support of it. If people use such identifiers, the result would 
> most likely be annoyance rather than illumination when people 
> who don't know that language have to work on the code.

Not seeing identifiers in languages you don't program in or can 
read in is expected.

If it's supported it will be used:

Japanese Swift: 
https://speakerdeck.com/codelynx/programming-swift-in-japanese

>
> Extending it further will also cause problems for all the tools 
> that work with D object code, like debuggers, disassemblers, 
> linkers, filesystems, etc.
>
> Absent a much more compelling rationale for it, I'd say no.

More compelling than: "there're 6 billion people in this world 
who don't speak english?"

Allowing people to program in their own language while reducing 
the cognitive friction for people who want to learn programming 
in the majority of the world seems like a no-brainer thing to do.