Re: Unicode in strings

On 14/05/2024 19:43, MitchAlsup1 wrote:

I think people in Japan should be able to use printf by using プリントフ
There is way to much "english" in the way computers are being used.

I disagree entirely here.
For many things, international consistency is more important than picking local-sounding names for things that have no localised meaning. Having a Japanese name and spelling for "printf" doesn't give Japanese programmers any useful information, it is not easier to type or read, and simply ensures that they can't cooperate and collaborate with programmers using different languages.  MS Office uses local languages for its macros and formulas in Excel - I've never heard anyone in Norway say they like it, and many who say it is a PITA that makes it hard to work with and hard to search for information.  Most people IME who macros a lot prefer to stick to English.
It works the other way too.  When discussing Karate or Judo, most practitioners the world over know what a "mawashi geri" or an "o soto gari" is - most consistently use the Japanese terms regardless of native languages.  Most, that is, except Americans and some other English speakers who feel they have to use English language terms, losing a lot of the subtlety and nuances of the terms and being different from their international peers.
And when people try to force localisation of terms that have no local words, the result is just to encourage people to move everything over to a single language (English).
 > It is similar to Anthropomorphizing animal behavior.
No, it is not.