This was an accidental wordwrap mistake posting from a tablet. Their code is formatted perfectly in conformance with the broad consensus for this kind of file.

I apologize for the proofreading as well. I'm playing with a development environment on a tablet and there's a little clunkiness to it.  

Yes, the original file follows the standard convention of having the template keyword and parameters on the line above the classes name and options. However, that has the readability issue which is worse in some ways. Now, every other line is a complex declaration while the other lines are complex prefixes to declarations. The new identifier you're looking for is really getting surrounded. And people (wisely) choose to bypass the logical indentation of the line after the template declaration by keeping it in column 0 even though it is a continuation.

I don't have any trouble reading any c++ code. This has nothing to do with saving typing - its about saving neuron activations while _reading_ code. This is from the perspective of large dynamic codebases and ways to improve readability across varying skill levels and commitment/time for fancy documentation (ie the game industry). Admittedly it is minor however it seems very symmetric with the new template-less template function syntax. When we already have a general syntax using angle brackets for "parameters that must be known at compile time, and can include typenames etc", maybe a the template<> keyword is just noise in some contexts especially now that we have Concepts. Obviosly there are hard limits in that direction without introducing ambiguity but I don't think this is one of them.

I think the macro hacks everyone does to get around namespace{ make the other half of the proposal pretty solid though?