On Friday, 29 December 2023 18:30:33 -03 Andrew Tomazos via Std-Proposals
wrote:
> Please find attached a short 2-page proposal:
>
> D3077R0 Proposal of static_cast shorthand: <T>(x) DRAFT 1
> https://isocpp.org/files/papers/D3077R0.pdf

This is missing a strong motivation section. The fact that something is used a
lot doesn't mean we need two ways to do the same thing.

Please address in your paper one of the main advantages of the C++ keyword
casts which static_cast does obey: that it's a very distinctive token and
easily searchable in codebases. Address why you think that we can do away with
this benefit. You obviously used this fact in searching the code base in your
paper, so it has some benefit. Please provide an opinion on the benefit of your
syntax versus the loss of the searchability.

And please add a section explaining how this cannot be ambiguous for existing
code already. In that section, please look into expressions involving the <
and > operators, so we don't unintentionally create a problem like C++98 's
need for a space in > >.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
   Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering