Hi all,

I'd like to ask for feedback on a draft proposal:

*Further relaxing the range-for loop customization point finding rules*

The proposal revisits the rule used by range-based for to choose between
member begin/end and ADL customization.

Currently, if class-scope lookup finds declarations named both begin and end,
range-based for commits to the member interpretation, even when the
corresponding member calls cannot actually participate. This can prevent an
otherwise valid non-intrusive ADL customization from being used, and also
contributes to the discrepancy described by LWG 4389.

The draft proposes committing to the member interpretation only when both
member operations are applicable.

I've attached the current draft for review.

I would particularly appreciate feedback on:

   -

   whether the motivating problem is sufficiently compelling;
   -

   whether candidate viability is the right boundary for member lock-in;
   -

   compatibility or implementation concerns I may have overlooked;
   -

   relevant prior work or edge cases that should be discussed.

This is my first WG21 proposal, so comments on the presentation and scope
are also very welcome.

Thanks,
Connor Song