not in

[rihad]

On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:05:57 +0100, "Alex Martelli" <aleax at aleax.it>
wrote:

>"rihad" <rihad at mail.ru> wrote in message
>news:3m4o4u8tnumteu12vtd8solunp2ai7kjvo at 4ax.com...
>> Why does python introduce new syntax with `x not in s'? Isn't it the
>
>What do you mean "new"?  Operator "not in" has been around for ages
>(as has operator "is not").
>
>> same as `not (x in s)'? Same for `is not'.
>
>Yes, the semantics are intended to be basically the same, just as
>the semantics of "not a and not b" had better be basically the same
>as those of "not (a or b)".  So what?  Would you can "not a and not b"
>``new syntax''?  I suspect I'm missing your point -- what IS it?
>
Sorry (language barrier?). By `new' I meant that `not in' is a
language construct, just as if it were a distinct not_in/is_not
keyword. IOW, `new' eq `not necessary'. :)