Is there any way to say ignore case with "in"?

[Mel]

Paul McGuire wrote:
> On Apr 6, 8:53 am, "Martin v. Löwis" <mar... at v.loewis.de> wrote:
>>>> I know I could use:-
>>>>     if lower(string1) in lower(string2):
>>>>         <do something>
>>>> but it somehow feels there ought to be an easier (tidier?) way.
>> Take, for example, U+017F, LATIN SMALL LETTER LONG S. It's .lower() is
>> the same character, as the character is already in lower case.
>> It's .upper() is U+0053, LATIN CAPITAL LETTER S. Notice that the LONG
>> is gone - there is no upper-case version of a "long s".
>> It's .upper().lower() is U+0073, LATIN SMALL LETTER S.
>>
>> So should case-insensitive matching match the small s with the small
>> long s, as they have the same upper-case letter?
[ ... ]
>>>> [i for i in range(65536) if unichr(i).lower().upper() !=
> ... unichr(i).upper()]
> [304, 1012, 8486, 8490, 8491]
> 
> Instead of 15 exceptions to the rule, conversion to upper has only 5
> exceptions.  So perhaps comparsion of upper's is, while not foolproof,
> less likely to encounter these exceptions?  Or at least, simpler to
> code explicit tests.

I don't know what meaning is carried by all those differences in 
lower-case glyphs.  Converting to upper seems to fold together a lot 
of variant pi's and rho's which I think would be roughly a good thing.
I seem to recall that the tiny iota (ypogegrammeni) has or had 
grammatical significance.  The other effect would be conflating 
physics' Angstron unit and Kelvin unit signs with ring-a and K. 
Applicaton programmers beware.

	Mel.