I read 1:n that way. And even if I didn't, I prefer to think about a looping construct as "do this for each element in that collection" - and regardless of how I pronounce 1:n, I see it as a collection since it inherits AbstractArray.
But I can also see how other mental models work for you. There's a lot of talk in this thread along the lines of "my mental model of this construct is better than yours, and therefore my syntax preference is better than yours." I find this ridiculously inconstructive - bordering on children arguing in the sandbox... To me, this just indicates that both mental models are valid that both syntaxes should, at least for the time being, stay. The fact that no clear winner can be found by counting usages in base further supports this. There is a suggestion in this thread worth keeping, though - supporting unicode \in would be a nice addition for those of us who embrace supersets of ascii. // Tomas
