Stupid little iota of an idea

[Nick Sabalausky]

"spir" <denis.spir at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.1423.1297254917.4748.digitalmars-d at 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.