What's the benefit here? If everything in this package uses% bookends, then there's nothing testing "not using %".

There is in the test files.

True. What's the benefit of this change tho?

The benefit is consistency and making it possible to deprecate the non‑% form.

I'm not sure why we'd want to deprecate it? callBound is the newest helper, and I intentionally left off the% for it.

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.01%. Comparing base (8a9cf6a) to head (945e629).
⚠️ Report is 630 commits behind head on main.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@##             main     #100      +/-   ##==========================================- Coverage   91.03%   91.01%   -0.02%==========================================  Files         647      647                Lines        8931     9031     +100       Branches     2109     2150      +41     ==========================================+ Hits         8130     8220      +90- Misses        801      811      +10

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report?Share it here.

Depending on the progression ofhttps://github.com/ljharb/proposal-get-intrinsic - in which I'm planning tonot require the% - I'll be happy to rebase and land this PR once the proposal advances far enough.