This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------ extPart_000_0070_01BFC966.A466A220
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset so-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Oops, previous post vanished somehow.
Thanks, Reuben, for your comments.
Well, I wish I knew where to find some absolutely
authoritative sources on these matters.
I realize that people are going to type however they
want. As I said, I'm not trying to get anyone to change.
But historically I find this very interesting.
For example, Eric S. Raymond in the Jargon File makes
the claim that the use of MATCHED quotes is a hackish
tradition or innovation, and implies that the use of
UNMATCHED quotes (such as Steven complains about)
are the norm.
He says that the use of matched quotes comes from the
habitual use of programming languages which use them,
and that they are NOT standard in everyday use. I claim
the opposite: That normal matched quotes showed up in
computer languages because they were the norm, and
that the unmatched quotes are the more recent (and
non-standard) innovation.
I have the dubious honor of having used typewriters since
I was 7, and never having seen a computer till 1977 or so
(when I was 16).
I never saw the mismatched quotes until (I guess) the mid-80s,
and I considered it to be an oddball computer nerd habit.
In fact, I thought it had to do with some software mis-handling
certain quoted strings. This was the old days, after all.
I have always been aware that in typeset books, left and right
single quotes are different. But I have also always been aware
that typing and typesetting are different things.Once the backtick
showed up on computer keyboards, it would never have occurred
to me to co-opt it for use as a left single quote, because: 1) On
90% of the keyboards/displays (then and now?) they don't appear
symmetrical; 2) They obviously don't correspond to each other,
since they are far apart on the keyboard, unlike {}[]()<>; 3) I have
never heard of anyone being taught to use them that way; 4) if they
had been adding a left single-quote, they would have added a left
double-quote also (and changed the appearance of the standard
quotes into right-handed ones!); and 5) the majority of the world
still does it the other way (just ask Steven Apter, who even in the
year 2000, has obviously reached adulthood without ever seeing
this construct before).
Some questions I have are:
1. When was the backtick added, and for what purpose? I always
assumed it was intended as some kind of accent mark.
2. What do older (60's /70's) typing books say?
3. What do the newer typing books say?
4. Did this practice possibly originate with TeX?
5. What do various style guides say?
If anyone chooses to comment on these, I encourage the use
of email.
But, as I said before, Ruby is more important.
ObRuby question: OK, if 'class' can be used as a method name, what
exactly are the limitations on the usage of keywords? So far I have
tried several things that worked unexpectedly. (I don't have the source
with me.)
You're welcome to quote from the bowels of the parser for others' benefit,
but I don't understand lex or yacc or parsers in general (other than the
handmade recursive-descent parsers I've worked with before).
Hal
------ extPart_000_0070_01BFC966.A466A220
Content-Type: text/html;
charset so-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2722.2800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Oops, previous post vanished somehow.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Thanks, Reuben, for your comments.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Well, I wish I knew where to find some
absolutely<BR>authoritative sources on these matters.<BR><BR>I realize that
people are going to type however they<BR>want. As I said, I'm not trying to get
anyone to change.<BR><BR>But historically I find this very
interesting.<BR><BR>For example, Eric S. Raymond in the Jargon File makes<BR>the
claim that the use of MATCHED quotes is a hackish<BR>tradition or innovation,
and implies that the use of<BR>UNMATCHED quotes (such as Steven complains
about)<BR>are the norm.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>He says that the use of matched quotes comes from
the</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>habitual use of programming languages which use
them,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>and that they are NOT standard in everyday use. </FONT><FONT
size=2>I claim </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>the opposite: That normal matched quotes showed </FONT><FONT
size=2>up in </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>computer languages because they were the norm, and
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>that the unmatched quotes are the more recent (and
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>non-standard) innovation.<BR><BR>I have the </FONT><FONT
size=2>dubious honor of having used typewriters since </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I was 7, and </FONT><FONT size=2>never having seen a computer
till 1977 or so </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>(when I was 16).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I never saw the mismatched quotes until (I guess) the
mid-80s,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>and I considered it to be an oddball computer nerd
habit.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In fact, I thought it had to do with some software
mis-handling</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>certain quoted strings. This was the old days, after ll.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I have always been aware that in typeset books, left and
right</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>single quotes are different. But I have also always been aware
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>that typing and typesetting are different things.Once the
backtick</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>showed up on computer keyboards, it would never have ccurred</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>to me to co-opt it for use as a left single quote, because: 1)
On</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>90% of the keyboards/displays (then and now?) they don't
appear</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>symmetrical; 2) They obviously don't correspond to each
other,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>since they are far apart on the keyboard, unlike
{}[]()<>; 3) I have</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>never heard of anyone being taught to use them that way; 4) if
they</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>had been adding a left single-quote, they would have added a
left</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>double-quote also (and changed the appearance of the tandard</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>quotes into right-handed ones!); and </FONT><FONT size=2>5)
the majority of the world </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>still does it the other way (just ask Steven Apter, who even
in the</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>year 2000, has obviously reached adulthood without ever seeing
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>this construct before).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Some questions I have are:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>1. When was the backtick added, and for what purpose? I
always</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>assumed it was intended as some kind of accent
mark.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>2. What do older (60's /70's) typing books say?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>3. What do the newer typing books say?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>4. Did this practice possibly originate with TeX?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>5. What do various style guides say? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If anyone chooses to comment on these, I encourage the
use </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>of email.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>But, as I said before, Ruby is more important.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>ObRuby question: OK, if 'class' can be used as a method name,
what </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>exactly are the limitations on the usage of keywords? So far I
have</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>tried several things that worked unexpectedly. (I don't have
the source</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>with me.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>You're welcome to quote from the bowels of the parser for
others' benefit,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>but I don't understand lex or yacc or parsers in general
(other than the</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>handmade recursive-descent parsers I've worked with
before).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Hal</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
------ extPart_000_0070_01BFC966.A466A220--