[gathering-options] Arrow symbol

[Brian Goetz]

Don't worry -- we're not seriously considering it (though some may still 
be seriously suggesting it.)

On 6/24/2011 5:44 PM, Yuval Shavit wrote:
> I personally think that using a unicode/non-ascii character would almost be
> like a cruel joke. "We'll give you a nice, concise syntax -- but you have to
> cramp your fingers and remember code points!" And relying on IDEs to fix a
> problem that shouldn't exist in the first place seems like bad policy.
>
> I know I don't have a lot of clout in this list :-) but the unicode chars
> have been bouncing around long enough that I'd feel remiss if I didn't say
> that, as someone who's very much looking forward to lambdas in Java, my
> reaction to having to type λ would be "at least there's a pony."
>
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 5:03 PM, David M. Lloyd<david.lloyd at redhat.com>wrote:
>
>> On 06/22/2011 09:53 AM, Mark Thornton wrote:
>>> On 22/06/11 14:43, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>>>> Use ->
>>>>      {x ->     x + 1}
>>>>      (x) ->     {x + 1}
>>>>
>>>> Use =>
>>>>      {x =>     x + 1}
>>>>      (x) =>     {x + 1}
>>>>
>>>>
>>> To save others the trouble here are the obvious unicode arrows
>>>
>>> Use ?
>>>      {x ?  x + 1}
>>>      (x) ?  {x + 1}
>>>
>>> Use ?
>>>      {x ?  x + 1}
>>>      (x) ?  {x + 1}
>>>
>>> (with a larger arrow font size)
>>>      {x?   x + 1}
>>>      (x)?   {x + 1}
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Doesn't look that good in the font/size shown above
>>
>> This came across as:
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> So can't really tell what you were after.  But I can say that there are
>> dozens of Unicode arrows... possibly thousands of Unicode candidates all
>> told.  I'm not sure it's wise to open that particular can of worms.
>>
>> --
>> - DML
>>
>>
>