[m-rev.] for post-commit review: warn about bad coerce arities

[Peter Wang]

On Tue, 28 May 2024 17:35:26 +1000 "Zoltan Somogyi" <zoltan.somogyi at runbox.com> wrote:
> 
> On 2024-05-28 17:32 +10:00 AEST, "Peter Wang" <novalazy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > No, the restrictions on type, inst and mode names don't go that far.
> > They stay within their own "categories".
> 
> That is correct. However, that is also exactly what I am proposing
> to do with "coerce": that all its uses *in goals* should be for the
> purpose of type coercion.

Presumably the same reasoning applies to other names that can appear
in goals as well.

I'm not convinced there are issues with "coerce", presumably "apply",
possibly "@" and ":" (no doubt more) that requires a blanket ban,
especially if we disregard arity. We have examples of three of those
as function names; we'd be going out of our way to not allow them.
My main concern is a growing list of reserved names, with no recourse
but to rename.

Peter