Revert "Restrict identifier grammar" #11687
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This reverts commit 1653cf3.
straight-shoota
added
kind:bug
oprypin
approved these changes
Jan 3, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This change had a good motivation (#11216), but it's a breaking change for code that uses restricted code points in identifiers. Such restrictions can be reasonable for certain kinds of characters, especially non-printables, because it serves an immediate purpose of ensuring code safety (cf #11406, #11392).
But breaking backwards compatibility for perfectly working identifiers such as most emojis is inacceptable for a minor release.
Imposing further restrictions on identifier names as proposed in #11216 is still a worthy goal. But we just can't do it at this point and we might want to think a bit more about the restriction scope.
Restricting non-printables should be acceptable as a short term change.
Reverts #11508