Ruben Schild

Hi Andrew, Do I understand it correctly that you want to introduce `BeAllLowerCased()` and `BeAllUpperCased()`, but with the current semantics of `BeLowerCased()` and `BeUpperCased()`? And then what do you consider...

Regarding the `NotBeLowerCased()` and `NotBeUpperCased()` changes suggested by @drewjcooper, wouldn't it be a better idea to also introduce new assertions for these, that asserts whether any character in a string...

> Although I suspect, it's not proper English. I agree. What about `NotHaveLowerCasing()` and `NotHaveUpperCasing()`, or `NotHaveAnyLowerCasing()` and `NotHaveAnyUpperCasing()`? Also curious what @drewjcooper thinks about this, and the naming.