Motive behind !empty() with front() instead of Optional front()

[Per Nordlöw]

On Tuesday, 6 April 2021 at 21:09:13 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
> For non-copyable types. It's actually needed in both cases--we 
> would need DIP 1040 (or something similar) to get rid of it.

So let's help Walter getting DIP-1040 accepted then. :)

What else is forward needed for? The doc says

"Forwards function arguments while keeping `out`, `ref`, and 
`lazy` on
the parameters."

Why can't the compiler do that for us?