s...@pandora.be writes:
> If I understand the footnote in the GNU Smalltalk syntax on := and _ > correctly, no Unicode is required anyway: > > The GNU smalltalk manual says: > " In the ancient days (like the middle 70’s), the ASCII underscore character > was also printed as a back-arrow, and many terminals would display it that > way, thus its current usage. " > > So it would be sufficient to find a font that displays _ as back-arrow, > which according to the above would exist for simple ASCII -- without Unicode > extensions. > > There are footnotes in the wikipedia page on ASCII > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII#cite_note-Haynes_2015-60 > > that up arrow and left arrow were in use. > > It says: > "By 1967 the underscore had spread to ASCII,[5] replacing the > similarly-shaped left-arrow character" With the newer smalltalk-mode from elpa, and if you enable prettify-symbols-mode in emacs, you will get the prettified unicode symbols. Currently there are only two that are defined: (defvar smalltalk-prettify-symbols-alist '(("^" . ?↑) (":=" . ?←))) Please note you cannot use the fancy symbols in source code though; it is only emacs tricking your eyes at display. Derek
