Any solution to a C++ problem that starts with "let's add a new
reference type to the language" is not a solution worth having.
There's really no point in considering it further.
However, if this were to be entertained further, then some explanation
of what's actually happening here is in order. You say that your new
reference type means that the "argument must be a prvalue?". OK, but
then you say "we need control over when the prvalue gets generated ".
This makes no sense. The fact that a variable must be initialized by a
prvalue doesn't change how variables work. "when the prvalue gets
generated" happened *before the function call*. If you want it to
happen differently from that, then you need to explain what those
differences are and how that works. Are you saying that the parameter
captures the entire expression, leaving it unevaluated until some time
*within* the function (which is not what it means for a variable to
"be a prvalue")? OK, so how does that work? Must the function be
inlined? If not, how can a compiler pass *arbitrary code* to a
concrete function that has no idea how any particular parameter was
initialized?
Overall, this idea doesn't even seem half-baked. I guess I shouldn't
be surprised given the source.
Just stop replying to him. He clearly has no intention of doing anything except throwing silly ideas out again and again and again. Engaging with him clearly doesn't discourage him. Maybe ignoring him will.