More accurate description of r/w segregation in README

README.md

@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ There are some practical differences that make a significant difference:
 - **Maturity:** Sycamore is obviously a much more mature and stable library with a larger ecosystem.
 - **Templating:** Leptos uses a JSX-like template format (built on [syn-rsx](https://github.com/stoically/syn-rsx)) for its `view` macro. Sycamore offers the choice of its own templating DSL or a builder syntax.
 - **Template node cloning:** Leptos's `view` macro compiles to a static HTML string and a set of instructions of how to assign its reactive values. This means that at runtime, Leptos can clone a `<template>` node rather than calling `document.createElement()` to create DOM nodes. This is a _significantly_ faster way of rendering components.
-- **Read-write segregation:** Leptos, like Solid, enforces read-write segregation between signal getters and setters, so you end up accessing signals with tuples like `let (count, set_count) = create_signal(cx, 0);`
+- **Read-write segregation:** Leptos, like Solid, encourages read-write segregation between signal getters and setters, so you end up accessing signals with tuples like `let (count, set_count) = create_signal(cx, 0);` *(If you prefer or if it's more convenient for your API, you can use `create_rw_signal` to give a unified read/write signal.)*
 - **Signals are functions:** In Leptos, you can call a signal to access it rather than calling a specific method (so, `count()` instead of `count.get()`) This creates a more consistent mental model: accessing a reactive value is always a matter of calling a function. For example:
 
 ```rust