bug#30513: Unicode Character Name is misspelled (MATHEMATICAL ITALIC SMALL LAMDA)

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> >> +                (if (and (not old-name) new-name (string-match
> "LAMDA" new-name))
> >> +                    (puthash (replace-match "LAMBDA" t t new-name) c
> names))
> >
> > Won't this make ucs-names even larger and more redundant?
> 
> It will make ucs-names slightly larger and more redundant.  I think the
> trade-off is worth it.  To give precise numbers, it adds 12 entries for
> a total of 42857, which is 0.029%.

I would not make the point that this adds too many chars
for `ucs-names' or for `C-x 8 RET'.

I would make the point that we should not be inventing
character names and then associating such inventions with
what has heretofore been a pretty faithful reflection of
the Unicode standard.

There are many different possible uses of `ucs-names'.
It should not be assumed that the only use is to complete
`C-x 8 RET' or that every use of that command or
`ucs-names' will be improved by "loose" matching that
allows names that are not defined by Unicode.

If someone wants a command (or a hash table or other
mapping similar to `ucs-names') that provides and uses
handy non-Unicode names, s?he can easily define it.

And if Emacs itself wants to provide such a command or
such a map-producing function it can do it.  But please
do not do this to `ucs-names' or the default behavior
for character insertion (i.e., `C-x 8 RET').  Every such
possible "improvement" of character names for one person
is sure to be a detriment to someone else and other use
cases.

Unicode itself does not define additional LAMDA versions
of character names.  `ucs-names' and `C-x 8 RET' should
respect that and faithfully reflect the Unicode standard.