No, it's just a matter of changing the parser to accept that – and convincing people that it's a good idea.
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 9:39 AM, DNF <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 2:29:54 PM UTC+1, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >> >> I think we're getting into Parkinson's law territory here. First off, I >> don't think this causes all that much confusion. Second, since this is pure >> syntax involving a keyword no less, this is one of the easiest things to >> mechanically fix should we chose to do so in the future. >> > > Fair enough. Could I just ask a question out of curiosity (not to try to > convince anyone of anything)? > > Are there any technical problems (or other problems) associated with > getting '∈' to work as a keyword, such as > for i ∈ etc... > ? >
