I was reading P3476R0, the latest slides on P2688 (Pattern Matching: `match` Expression), and found specific content confusing.

  Question 1. To be or not to be

The slide at page 6 shows the `{a, b} match ...` syntax for multiple values matching, and declares the removal of the design with a "workaround" of matching a single `std::tuple`, structured binding it to perform detailed matching in the `pattern`.

Far as I see, both ways work well.

Then the slides at page 35 & 36 presents more information about why the `{a, b} match ...` syntax got abandoned, and the practicability of adopting `(a, b) match ...` syntax as a drop-in replacement.

So, are we going to use the `(a, b) match ...` replacement, or stick to the `std::tuple`/structured binding workaround? Because it affects only the `expr` before `match`, and I don't see big differences between them, I really don't know which one has the "go" sign, and which one has "leave".

  Question 2. Ambiguity between `(a, b) match ...` and `(a, b) match ...`

This is quite a obvious question, for the infamous `,` operator that exists.

Of course, a more obvious answer is, if we explicitly see `(a, b) match ...` as multiple values matching-only, then comma expression matching would have to be `((a, b)) match ...`. But that's not so intuitive to me, because there's no reason `(a, b)` shouldn't be considered a valid `expr` before `match` in terms of clarity.

And we don't have the wording for multiple values matching yet. So it's a bit hard to give this a clear answer.

  Thanks for your patience. I'm looking forward to see any answer, clarification, or explanation. Do point me out if there's anything wrong with my idea.