"spir" <denis.s...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.1423.1297254917.4748.digitalmar...@puremagic.com...
>
> PS: your proposal would also logically allow, I guess, expressions like (n
> in min..max). Would love it.
>
Unfortunately, not unless "in" was changed to allow "{expr} in {range}". And
from prior discussions of "in", I seem to remember Walter and Andrei are
strongly against allowing "in" to be used to check for element values rather
than just AA keys.
But Andrei did recently propose an "any", IIRC, that would allow something
like what you're suggesting.
