Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> schrieb am Do., 3. März 2016 um 17:11 Uhr:

> On 03/02/2016 09:47 PM, Lars Ingebrigtsen wrote:
> > And then I thought -- well, if we should have a literal syntax for
> > Unicode control characters, why not for all of them?
> Something like that would make sense. The escape sequence should bracket
> the name, so that the escape sequences could be used in strings without
> ambiguity. Something like \u[NAME], say.
>
> I'd still prefer to use characters as-is in strings if they're
> displayable, e.g., the Lisp string:
>
> "Use Greek capital letters (Α–Ω) to denote figures."
>
> is more readable than:
>
> "Use Greek capital letters (\u[GREEK CAPITAL LETTER ALPHA]\u[EN
> DASH]\u[GREEK CAPITAL LETTER OMEGA]) to denote figures."
>
> But for undisplayable or hard-to-read characters the escape sequence
> would be a win.
>
> More issues: should we insist on the full official name? should we allow
> obsolescent aliases? lower-case instead of upper case? initial prefixes
> of names?
>
>
We should probably do whatever Perl does (
http://perldoc.perl.org/charnames.html). I haven't checked in detail what
is allowed by Perl (except that it allows \N{name} and \N{U+code}), but it
would be simpler to just adopt Perl's behavior (to a reasonable extend)
than trying to come up with our own syntax.