>     yes = "yes"
>     no = "no"
>     x = nil
>     p x.nil? yes: no
>
> Hmm.  Not interesting?

Well, the main thing here is that the '?' and ':' are part of the
accompanying symbols so they would be classed as part of the symbol name.
Ruby already does this for symbols ending in '?'.  I don't see what the
problem is.  If we were talking about a C/C++ parser then that's a different
matter...

Also, 'yes:' would only be valid inside a method argument list and so would
cause a parsing error in this case.

--
Justin Johnson.