Status of PEP's?

[David Eppstein]

In article <mailman.1015518734.6414.python-list at python.org>,
 "Bjorn Pettersen" <BPettersen at NAREX.com> wrote:

> This surely doesn't have to be true. The for loop implicitly calls
> iter(seq) to get an iterator, and the if statement first tries to call
>   contains   when faced with an 'in' test. It's trivial to implement a
>   contains   method for type int that preserves the orthogonality.
> You're right though that the PEP should probably say whether it also
> proposes to implement   contains   for type int.

It doesn't have to -- x in y will fall back on __iter__ if it doesn't 
find a contains, won't it?  Of course implementing a matching contains 
method would be more efficient, if we wanted to actually encourage x in 
integer tests.