David

Would it be possible to use `--` instead of just `-` to replace `::`? Even if `--` (or `__`) is allowed in crate names today, it's at least uncommon.

Oh, I see, thank you for the example, that makes it clear to me how it is intended to be used. It seems obvious in retrospect, but thank you for...

```rust use bon::builder; // The previous name of the positional function needs to be specified // as the value for `expose_positional_fn`. #[builder(start_fn = example_builder, expose_positional_fn = example)] fn example(x: u32,...

I haven't used this crate properly yet so there's no risk of breakage for me, but I appreciate the concern :)

I'm struggling to grasp all of this, I will need some time to tinker and get a feeling for how it works. I'll try and make some before and after...

I might not have made this clear, but my question is mostly hypothetical. If *someone* needed backwards compatibility, how would they go about it.

I believe this is due to use of physical properties in places like this: https://github.com/picocss/pico/blob/main/scss%2Fcomponents%2F_group.scss#L27-L36 Instead of left/right/top/bottom it should be inline-start/end/block-start/end. [Corners](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/CSS_logical_properties_and_values/Margins_borders_padding#flow_relative_border-radius_properties) are also possible. I will raise a...

oh, I should also add: I'm using pact specification 4.0 - it's there in the pacts, but just to point it out explicitly

I also have the logs (DEBUG verbosity) from my full pytest repro in case that helps ``` --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Captured stderr setup ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2025-07-11T07:46:44.008319Z DEBUG ThreadId(01) pact_ffi::verifier: pact_ffi::verifier::pactffi_verifier_new_for_application FFI function invoked...