From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,3bf50ede73cff892 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Operators Questions Date: 1996/11/02 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 193811712 sender: news@organon.com (news) references: <3275D478.5952@eurocontrol.fr> organization: Organon Motives, Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-11-02T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <55b9mb$kk6@krusty.irvine.com> adam@irvine.com (Adam Beneschan) writes: > jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) writes: > >In article mheaney@ni.net (Matthew Heaney) writes: > > > >> Language designers: any reason overloading of "in" is too difficult for > >> inclusion in the language? Why can't you do this already? This exclusion > >> of the ability to overload "in" seems rather odd and unexpected. > > > >It's a reserved word... > > So are "and" and "or" . . . Wow. You really have to be pretty darn stupid to check that "in" is a reserved word and then not bother to see (on the very same page) that "and", "or", "xor" are too... I mean, really. /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com