Add pl.col(...).is_not_in(<iterable>) method

[DeflateAwning]

Description

Feature Request: Add pl.col(...).is_not_in(<iterable>) method.

Using the bitwise inverter/negator (~) with .is_in([...]) is a bit easier to miss, easier to screw up order-of-operations, etc. In the same way that there's a .is_null() and .is_not_null(), I think it would be awesome if there were both is_in() and is_not_in().

Not that this bears much weight, but GitHub Copilot expects it to exist, which suggests it's common in similar/competitor libraries.

[owenprough-sift]

Duplicate of "wontfix" #6574, but I would also appreciate having an is_not_in() expression. It would be convenient/ergonomic. But if the rationale from the other issue holds, should I submit an issue to remove is_not_null()?

[DeflateAwning]

Darn, well I guess I'll ask again and see if they'll reconsider

[stinodego]

We will not add this, for the reasons mentioned in the linked issue.

If you don't like negating with ~ you can also use not_, e.g. pl.col(...).is_in(...).not_().

is_not_null is there because it is a (free) represention of the underlying validity buffer. We may remove it when we have sufficiently improve our IR.

[DeflateAwning]

Darn, well thanks for the response anyway