Hubert,

on Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:27:28 -0400 you (Hubert Tong
<hubert.reinterpretcast@gmail.com>) wrote:

> > The fourth is, that the `default` case needs a template, which we
> > obviously don't have in C and which we will probably never have, for
> > the same reasons.
> > 
> Envisioning generic as a group of overloads is interesting. With C++,
> we now have abbreviated function templates, so even the non-default
> cases can be templates somewhat directly.

Probably yet another thing that I'd have to learn about C++.

> The observation that C++
> could use something like generic was the subject of a previous paper:
> https://wg21.link/p0404.

Very interesting, indeed, thanks for the link.

(Though I am not able to comprehend all of this, my C++ is probably
much too basic.)

So, from the date on that paper I guess you didn't find enough support
for this?