<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">I agree with Felix.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">I wouldn't be in favor of introducing a keyword that replaces a method call.</blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div>Note that `not in` operator actually consists of two operators – `not`, which would be an alias for `!` and `in` which would be an alias for `contains()`.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">As said by my preceding speakers, there are no operator-like keywords in Swift so far, and In my opinion, there shouldn't be any.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">By the way,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Most programmers would probably love using them though.</blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div>Please do no speak in the name of majority without actual numbers. :)</div><div class=""><br class=""><div class="">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><font color="#929292" class=""><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">Pozdrawiam – Regards,</font></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><font color="#929292" class="">Adrian Kashivskyy</font></div>
</div>
<br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">Wiadomość napisana przez Félix Cloutier via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> w dniu 17.12.2015, o godz. 17:16:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="">I don't like it because it introduces a second way to do something that's already quite easy.<br class=""><br class="">It's impossible for the Swift compiler to enforce that people never create a `contains` method (or create it without adhering to whatever protocol `in` uses behind the scenes), so in my opinion this would increase the burden of creating types that feel first-class.<br class=""><br class="">As it's already been said before, Swift has been very careful with keywords so far. I wouldn't be in favor of introducing a keyword that replaces a method call.<br class=""><br class="">Félix<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Le 17 déc. 2015 à 10:48:02, Jeremy Pereira via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> a écrit :<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On 17 Dec 2015, at 15:59, Amir Michail via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On Dec 17, 2015, at 9:51 AM, Brent Royal-Gordon <<a href="mailto:brent@architechies.com" class="">brent@architechies.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">if “hello” in [“hello, there”] { … }<br class=""><br class="">if “hello” not in [“hello, there”] { … }<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Swift is extremely sparing with keywords in operator position; the only ones I can think of off the top of my head are `is` and `as`, and even those aren’t actually operators. You’re proposing to introduce one as syntactic sugar for [array].contains(elem), and introduce an even more bizarre two-word operator for ![array].contains(elem). I don’t think that’s gonna fly.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">Most programmers would probably love using them though.<br class=""></blockquote><br class=""><br class="">If that’s the case, I’d be in the minority. <br class=""><br class="">I’d rather use [“hello", “there”].contains(“hello”). That might just be my background though which is heavily object oriented.<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class="">-- <br class="">Brent Royal-Gordon<br class="">Architechies<br class=""><br class=""></blockquote><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class="">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class="">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class="">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution<br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>