I agree wholeheartedly.
In my opinion the syntax is best kept simple (especially while people are
discussing how
to implement another interpreter and Matz keeps saying parse.y is a mess).
Personnaly
I really dislike special cases and I already find that the way some operator
are implemented
as method calls while others are not is practical but hurts my sense of
consistency and symetry
(I would have prefered a general syntax to define infix methods but I also
understand the
parsind difficulties it would introduces).  Lets not add many more unneeded
special cases.
Benoit
> Natural in English... but very unmathematical, and inconsistent with
> all other operators in Ruby.
> We can't say "x not == 5" (yes, we can say x != 5, but != is an operator
> in itself).
>
> I think "not" should be applied to an expression ("not some_expr").
> "in [1,2,3]" is not an expression.
> It makes "not in" into an operator on its own.
>
> I won't fight it with my life; if it made its way into the syntax, I just
> wouldn't use it.
>
> Hal
>
>