Perl's lack of 'in' keyword

[Nigel Rantor]

Andy Armstrong wrote:
> On 8 Oct 2008, at 14:51, Nigel Rantor wrote:
>> If anyone comes back and tell me that they think ~~ scans nicely in 
>> english, is easier to type and provides a better, clearer explanation 
>> of what it does in code than 'in' I will say no more on the subject 
>> because we would just be dealing with a huge gulf in our mental models 
>> of the world.
> 
> 
> But ~~ isn't the same as in - it's a smart match not an inclusion test.

mea culpa.

and as it's an operator in the sense of ==, &&, || etc how about we 
simply have another name for it like 'and', 'or' and 'not' for those of 
us who want to talk English in Perl?

Yes, I realise I just started another two wars with the above comment. 
But hey, it's my birthday, I'm allowed.

   n