Yes, that's one way to understand it. I had previously overlooked and missed this feature of ranges::to. Thank you for providing this important information.

From: Std-Proposals <std-proposals-bounces@lists.isocpp.org> on behalf of Giuseppe D'Angelo via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2026 20:05
To: std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org>
Cc: Giuseppe D'Angelo <giuseppe.dangelo@kdab.com>
Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Proposal: ranges::reserve

On 16/07/2026 10:24, Yexuan Xiao via Std-Proposals wrote:
> I have realized that the second version I proposed is incorrect and the
> first version is correct, except for its name and the parameter.

Just to better understand, are you proposing to expose/standardize the
functionality currently "hidden" into ranges::to?

Specifically the reserveable-container machinery in

https://eel.is/c++draft/range.utility.conv#to-2.1.4

https://eel.is/c++draft/range.utility.conv#general-3

Thanks,
--
Giuseppe D'Angelo