Hi, > The team intend to modify the existing \<thing>_case:nnn functions, > renaming the last argument as 'F'. This reflects the fact that this > final argument is used only when the test case (<thing>-dependent) is > logically false, and follows the approach used elsewhere. I think it's not a good decision. The argument specifier F implies for me that there is also a true part (T). So I would prefer to use \<thing>_case:nnn. > At the same > time, we intend to introduce \<thing>_case:nn, where there is no false > branch (i.e. where 'do nothing' is the appropriate action). > I think this is a good decision. I hope it's ok to post my thoughts here. Best regards Marco