On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 18:15, Barry Revzin <barry.revzin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I find it rather plausible that a simplicity-seeking programmer will
>> just not provide a structured-bindings
>> interface that he also wants to allow calling via ADL outside
>> structured bindings when an implementation
>> of P0846 is not available.
> I'm having trouble parsing this sentence. Is the claim that being unable to write get<0>(e) is a reason for somebody to avoid opting into structured bindings?

The claim is that it's plausible to not provide a get<> if it can't be
ADL-called without additional incantations.
Choosing to do so will also not-enable support for structured bindings.