On Mon, 8 Dec 2025 at 23:20, Barry Revzin via Std-Proposals
<std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> I'm going to not to be empathetic: it actually does not take very much effort at all to motivate the existence of a problem.
>
> The OP so far has simply pointed out that something does not work. I haven't seen any attempt to articulate why it should work. Just a statement that it should, and increasingly antagonistic refusals to elaborate further. It's not even that I disagree with OP's argument that this is worth changing, I disagree with the premise that OP has even made an argument. If it's not worth OP's time to fully motivate a change, why is it worth any of our time to discuss it?

As a remotely concrete suggestion for how the OP could improve things,
maybe there could be a before/after comparison of code you need to
write,
and some performance numbers, too. Or if the goal isn't increased
performance, then what is it. I'm failing to find a cromulent
description of what
the benefit of the suggested change is, or what the goal of the work is.