I dun a DIP, possibly the best DIP ever

[Q. Schroll]

On Friday, 8 May 2020 at 17:19:18 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> I doubt it would be a breaking change, as Ts... would suffice 
> (if you really wanted to "abuse" that feature). As in, it won't 
> break any existing code, because nobody would do that.

That's what I said. As I understand the document explaining what 
a DIP needs to address, silent change of behavior *must* be 
addressed in a DIP.

> I'd say it's fine for the DIP to take over that syntax.

Sure.