Updating D beyond Unicode 2.0

[Walter Bright]

On 9/26/2018 5:46 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> This is a non-starter. We can't break people's code, especially for trivial 
> reasons like 'you shouldn't code that way because others don't like it'. I'm 
> pretty sure Walter would be against removing Unicode support for identifiers.

We're not going to remove it, because there's not much to gain from it.

But expanding it seems of vanishingly little value. Note that each thing that 
gets added to D adds weight to it, and it needs to pull its weight. Nothing is free.

I don't see a scenario where someone would be learning D and not know English. 
Non-English D instructional material is nearly non-existent. dlang.org is all in 
English. Don't most languages have a Romanji-like representation?

C/C++ have made efforts in the past to support non-ASCII coding - digraphs, 
trigraphs, and alternate keywords. They've all failed miserably. The only people 
who seem to know those features even exist are language lawyers.