I think that adding a `no` keyword as an alias for `not` would make for more readable, simple, pythonic code.

Take the below:

```

if not val:

do_thing_because_value_is_falsy()

```

could be (is actually understood as):

```

if no val:

do_thing_because_value_is_falsy()

```

I think this PEP is a work-around for an underlying subtle issue with how the `not` operator is used.

It has two use-cases:

1. as a NOT gate for producing opposite boolean values

```

opposite = not regular

```

2. as a sort of ".is_falsy()" checker; when used with an if statement.

like the first example.

This PEP would make the difference between the two usecases explicit.

Thoughts?

Best Intentions,

Daniel Okey-Okoro.