Aristotle wrote: > * The `no VERSION` form will surprise you unless you put it in a block. Can you explain how you expect "no VERSION" to work? Currently it is a no-op for versions higher than the current, and an error otherwise. Since it is an error, we could theoretically change it. Considering that eventuality, we might want to think about this now. But I do not see what is going on inside your head when you write: > The first approach makes assertion simple and negation surprising. The > second equalises the surprise factor at the cost of more complex assertion. Would "no 5.012" be equivalent to "use 5.010" after "use 5.012" and a no-op otherwise?Thread Previous | Thread Next