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 <monnier@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
>
>