Vincent Isambart wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> > > Why are :>, :>=, :<=, :< fine as symbols, while := isn't?
>> >
>> > The only thing that strikes me is that the </> ones are all methods,
>> > whereas = is an operator.  But that's more of a clue than an
>> > answer....
>>
>> Ah, true.  :== is fine, while := isn't.  Oh well.
> 
> I think that's because you can redefine all comparison operators, but
> not =. = is always an simple assignment.
> 
> Cheers,
> Vincent

That's true, but there is this strangeness:

irb(main):020:0> x = []
=> []
irb(main):021:0> class <<x; define_method(:"=") do; 4; end; end
=> #<Proc:0xb7c875e0@(irb):21>
irb(main):022:0> x.send(:"=")
=> 4

-- 
       vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407