not in

[borcis]

rihad wrote:
> 
> Why does python introduce new syntax with `x not in s'? Isn't it the
> same as `not (x in s)'? Same for `is not'.

Guess you need to appreciate the charm as a mimick
of English grammar of "x not in s" or "o is not p",
consistent with python's look as "executable pseudocode".

For instance it allows the one-liner python solution
to the Turing test (which I guess I need to announce
a bit more widely) :

filter(lambda W : W not in "ILLITERATE","BULLSHIT")

This program clearly demonstrates python's aptitude
to close ranks just as any intelligent american
citizen.

BB