On 2026-04-17 15:55, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen wrote:

> Am Fr., 17. Apr. 2026 um 15:42 Uhr schrieb Jakub T. Jankiewicz
> <xxxxxx@jcubic.pl>:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2026 19:56:53 +0700
>> Andrew Tropin <xxxxxx@trop.in> wrote:
>>
>> > The most heated discussion so far was regarding assertion naming, `is`
>> > syntax in particular.
>>
>>
>> If name of "is" the most problematic. Let's make a compromise and make a
>> way to define it yourself.
>
> Well, that's what the library system is for. :) If you don't like
> `is`, you can use `rename` with the `import`.
>
> It makes no sense to add another layer.

Make sense for me.  Let's keep it as it `is` :D  And I'll add a note to
the spec that users of the library can rename on import if they prefer
it the other way, or they can wrap it with another macro for more
complex use cases.  Jakub, will rename on import work?

As for an internal entity.  Assertion, check?  Any thoughts or
preferences here?

--
Best regards,
Andrew Tropin