It was removed in a later proposed edit. I read the setopt code more deeply and ran some tests.
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 3:09 PM Stefan Monnier <monn...@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote: > > If you encounter a discrepancy that cannot be addressed by amending > > the type specified by a setopt call, and you can deem the desired > > type compatible nonetheless, use setq. If the user option has an > > associated \"setter\" you may invoke it manually using ???" > > You're here trying to describe workarounds to use in case of bugs > (either the value you set is wrong, or the type (or type-checker) is > wrong). We usually don't do that in docstrings. > > > Stefan > >
