Is there a difference between past and future actions regarding oaths conditioned upon performance?

Primary text

The past and future are equal in this matter. If someone swears, 'I have not prayed, married, or sold,' and had performed these acts defectively (voidly), he violates his oath, because the past action is only intended by its name, which the defective act covers. The future is different because marriage and sale in the future are intended to establish ownership, and prayer is intended as an act of worship. The correct position is that what the name does not cover in the future, it does not cover in the past, just as in obligation or non-specified matters.