# Syntax: Escape hatch for unicode haters

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/syntax-escape-hatch-for-unicode-haters/108363>\
**Category:** Internals & Design\
**Tags:** syntax, unicode\
**Created:** [January 4, 2024, 11:55pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/syntax-escape-hatch-for-unicode-haters/108363 "2024-01-04T23:55:47Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 95

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ininterrompue](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/ininterrompue/32/5594_2.png) [@Ininterrompue](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Ininterrompue)\
**Post date:** [January 12, 2024, 6:09pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/syntax-escape-hatch-for-unicode-haters/108363/95 "2024-01-12T18:09:39Z")

</div>

The second proposal I’d fully support. The amount of times I’ve seen, say, `for i ∈ array` in non-mathematical contexts over the years is pretty annoying, not only because it provides zero benefits for readability, but also in large part because looking from a new user perspective, many may not understand what ∈ even is and if it’s different from the keyword `in`.

It really is a social/cultural problem at the end of the day - for example, programmers writing in a language without convenient Unicode support would happily write `um` for micrometers and not have to bother with any of these questions.

I recall a [post](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/not-only-for-technical-computing-changing-the-narrative-around-the-usecase-for-julia/19784/7) by ninjaaron years back which I didn’t think of much at the time but perhaps has some meaning now. The preponderance of mathematical symbols in a community presents a barrier to understanding for someone from a non-scientific background.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/syntax-escape-hatch-for-unicode-haters/108363)._