Am 07.12.20 um 09:50 schrieb Corentin Jabot:
>
> Will there be problems for EBCDIC systems? AFAIK, C++ dropped support
> for EBCDIC the moment there was no IBM representative in WG14. But C
> still supports it.
>
>
>
> Unicode identifiers happen in C++ after phase 1 and so neither the
> source encoding nor the execution encoding are impacted.
>

I see. Thanks.

>
> P.S.: A related topic, but far less ambitious: Would it make sense to
> add @ and $ to the basic source character set
> (http://www.colecovision.eu/stuff/proposal-basic-_at_[hidden]
> <http://www.colecovision.eu/stuff/proposal-basic-_at_[hidden]>)? AFAIK, this
> should work for implementations that use ASCII (or an extension, such as
> UTF-8) as well as those that use an EBCDIC code page that can be used
> for C programming today.
>
>
> It's actually more ambitious I am afraid. This question is asked
> frequently in WG21 and 2 arguments against it are
>
> @ is used by objective-c(++) and $ is 1/valid in identifiers in some gcc
> implementation extension 2/ used by code generators.

I see that as an argument against allowing them in identifiers. But I
don't see the argument against adding them to the basic character set,
so one could portably use them in comments, string and character literals.