Re: character sets as they relate to “Raw†string literals for elisp

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > This is certainly true. In the ideal multilingual Emacs in my head
  > everything is translated, even the source code (well, at least the elisp
  > source). Every symbol has an English name as well as translated names,
  > and when you visit a source file the translated names for your language
  > are transparently swapped in and everything is reindented so that it
  > looks right.

If the idea is that people write the code in English (symbols and
comments), and later provide translations for them, it would be fine
_in principle_.  The English version should be the real code, the code
that really runs.  This way, confusions in translation would not cause
actual bugs.  Thus, people changing the code would have to write in
English.

Providing the translations could provide a way to usefully employ the
good will of tens of thousands of eager contributors, if only we had
them.

Still, I am against actually trying this, because it would not improve
actual _use_ of Emacs.  Anyway, programmers need to learn English.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)