Hal Fulton writes:

| I propose that the (pseudo) operator "in" (named as such) should
| result in a call to include? "under the hood," i.e., x in y or
| any arbitrary pair of objects x and y, should behave exactly the
| same as y.include? x, returning true or false and making possible
| syntax like: if node in binary_tree then ...

After some thought, I like it too.

Python has the construct 'x in y', and it is handy.  And Python's
usually pretty convervative when it comes to adding extra syntax.

Unfortunately, in Python, it only works when y is an array, not when
it's a hash, which many people find confusing (especially since, for
large sets, sets are often better represented by hashes than arrays).
I see that Ruby already has an 'include?' method in all the right
places, so this wouldn't be a problem.

-- 
                 Dan Schmidt | http://www.dfan.org
Honest Bob CD now available! | http://www.dfan.org/honestbob/cd.html