Edit: As a mathematician, this is actually kind of annoying. Sometimes I would love to have different variables named x and π±, or whatever. Oh well, at least I can have ΞΈ, Ξ», Ο, Ο, etc. Autohotkey macros make them easy to type.
Sure, that's true in Python. Python has some reasonable assumptions built into it in this ares. The X programming language, on the other hand, was built by someone whose prior work in language creation was so egregious as to warrant a court order against further such activity. (Only to be overturned, one would presume, on 1st amendment grounds)
βLanguage P has a mechanism by which it conflates several different glyphs into a canonical form for the sake of variable namesβ is not an βactually not trueβ kind of exception.
A mathematician such as yourself (and myself too) should recognise that asserting different things to be functionally equal is an entirely distinct phenomenon from what is being discussed here, which is differentiating a unique glyph based on a formatting that (font).
This bit is the incorrect bit: "a computer would never be confused into think theyβre even remotely similar". Python is treating different glyphs as if they're the same but formatted differently.
The following are all interpreted as X in variable names: Xβ ©οΌΈπππΏπ§ππππ·π«πππ
And these are all interpreted as x: xΛ£ββ Ήο½π±π₯ππππ΅π©πππ πΉππ‘
I.e. ππ, ππ© and Xx all represent the same variable!
Edit: As a mathematician, this is actually kind of annoying. Sometimes I would love to have different variables named x and π±, or whatever. Oh well, at least I can have ΞΈ, Ξ», Ο, Ο, etc. Autohotkey macros make them easy to type.