"with" still sucks + removing features + adding features

[bearophile]

Bill Baxter:
> Agreed.  If you tell someone   a .. b  means a non-inclusive range
> from a to b, then ask them to guess what    blarf a .. blarf b  means,
> I would be very surprised if many guessed "inclusive range from blarf
> a  to blarf b".

Thank you for nicely expressing one of the critics I was trying to express.
(My other problem is that I'd like a more general syntax).

------------------------

A different simple solution can be:
case a .. b+1:
That requires no new syntax.

Bye,
bearophile