Re: Re: This is kind of cool

Mark Hahn wrote:

>...
> 
> If we wanted user-defined operators I'd argue for Ruby's solution. They let
> you define symbols the same as labels.  They make an exception allowing
> arbitrary symbols only after the "def" in that one place.
> 
>     def +(a, b):
>         blah blah blah
> 
>     def ~%~(x, y):
>         blah blah blah

I can't find anything to indicate that Ruby lets you define your own new 
operators.

  Paul Prescod