C++ UFCS update

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 13 February 2016 at 10:27:59 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
> "Abstract
> This is the proposed wording for a unified call syntax based on 
> the idea that f(x,y) can invoke a member function, x.f(y), if 
> there are no f(x,y). The inverse transformation, from x.f(y) to 
> f(x,y) is not proposed."
>
> They were considering 6 alternatives and chose the worst...
> https://isocpp.org/files/papers/P0251R0.pdf

It makes a lot of sense in C++ actually. It allow to unify 
begin/end for instance.