At 10:14 PM 6/20/2006 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote: >Hm, so this still doesn't help if you write >> case S: ... >>(where S is an immutable set or sequence) when you meant >> case in S: ... >>so I'm not sure if it's worth the subtleties. Well, EIBTI and all that: switch x: case == 1: foo(x) case in S: bar(x) It even lines up nicely. :)