On Dec 29, 2005, at 9:45 AM, Steve Litt wrote:

> On Thursday 29 December 2005 10:16 am, dblack / wobblini.net wrote:
>>
>> Just out of curiosity:  can you describe how symbols would work if
>> they weren't surprising?
>
> They wouldn't exist, or they wouldn't be called symbols. If I'm  
> referring to
> an instance instead of a value, I could call it &variable as in C,  
> or I could
> call it :variable, but in that case I'd call it a reference, not a  
> symbol.

You are still confused.  <laughs>

Symbols are nothing like references.  They would be much closer to  
enums, if you want a C-ish comparison.

James Edward Gray II