DIP 1016--ref T accepts r-values--Community Review Round 1

[Manu]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2018 at 13:55, 12345swordy via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> > It's not a false equivalence fallacy: all the discussion is
> > about IMPLICIT conversion or rvalues to lvalues.
> Yes it is, the issues regarding rvalue/lvalue conversion is not
> the same issues regarding the unsigned/signed conversion.

I don't want to encourage this tangent, but I do want to say; there's
no proposal of rvalue -> lvalue *conversion*.
The proposal is "ref accepts rvalues". There's no 'conversion'
anywhere in sight. That's not on the menu.