--98e8jtXdkpgskNou
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Jan Maurits Faber:

>  For example, something like:=20
>  a>=3Db ? {:a=3D>!b} : nil=20

> Could be displayed as:=20
>   a=E2=89=A5b ? :a =E2=86=92 =C2=ACb : =E2=88=85=20

> I don't know of any language that can do this yet

APL does this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_%28programming_language%29#Examples

That said, and as much as my idealism supports the above, I=E2=80=99m again=
st
this on practicality basis. First, Ruby strives to be encoding-agnostic,
which means the above should work for any file in any encoding that
covers these symbols. Second, I don=E2=80=99t believe Ruby core code constr=
ucts
(as opposed to strings or even user-created classes and methods) should
be outside of low ASCII; I=E2=80=99d even say that class name =C5=81=C3=B3d=
=C5=BA is not very
portable and usable, and one should use Lodz instead (note that, in
theory at least, =C5=81=C3=B3d=C5=BA is supported in 1.9, provided you use =
the same
encoding for the class definition and the files that use it).

-- Shot
--=20
We're going for 'working' here. 'Clean' is for
people with skills...     -- Flemming Jacobsen

--98e8jtXdkpgskNou
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFJFBuIi/mCfdEo8UoRAi9dAKChHttT28irIbvO1uxhXwWlnAShUQCeM0IH
Ma5EKvVptqissBPqkhY/2X0=
=OX/O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--98e8jtXdkpgskNou--

Jan Maurits Faber:

>  For example, something like: 
>  a>=b ? {:a=>!b} : nil 

> Could be displayed as: 
>   ab ? :a  b :  

> I don't know of any language that can do this yet

APL does this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APL_%28programming_language%29#Examples

That said, and as much as my idealism supports the above, Im against
this on practicality basis. First, Ruby strives to be encoding-agnostic,
which means the above should work for any file in any encoding that
covers these symbols. Second, I dont believe Ruby core code constructs
(as opposed to strings or even user-created classes and methods) should
be outside of low ASCII; Id even say that class name d is not very
portable and usable, and one should use Lodz instead (note that, in
theory at least, d is supported in 1.9, provided you use the same
encoding for the class definition and the files that use it).

-- Shot
-- 
We're going for 'working' here. 'Clean' is for
people with skills...     -- Flemming Jacobsen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFJFBuIi/mCfdEo8UoRAi9dAKChHttT28irIbvO1uxhXwWlnAShUQCeM0IH
Ma5EKvVptqissBPqkhY/2X0=
=OX/O
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----