Yes, we should keep different styles in mind. However,

I think programming style was part of the reason we left at() out, whether we want to admit it or not.
It uses std : : logic_error, which is practically an oxymoron. If there was an error in logic, then why trust the code to properly catch the error?

If we thought at() was important, then the <span> implementation could use and link against a function throw_out_of_range_for_span(), keeping string out of the header, and being terminate or noop for freestanding.

Ergo we didn't think at() was worth the effort.

We make style decisions daily, whether we admit it or not. ‎Every API decision is a style decision.

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
  Original Message
From: Ville Voutilainen
Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2020 11:37 AM
To: sotrdg sotrdg via Std-Proposals
Cc: Tony V E
Subject: Re: [std-proposals] std::span

On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 at 18:31, Tony V E via Std-Proposals
<std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Or you could stop using at.

Or program in perl, where despite some of the leaders being far more
religious than we are, they are also far
less dogmatic about what programming styles should be used.