On Tuesday, 27 October 2020 at 10:54:07 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
>
> Here in the discussion thread, you are free to discuss anything
> and everything related to the DIP. Express your support or
> opposition, debate alternatives, argue the merits, etc.

The DIP brings compile-time improvements, but this is a feature
relatively reserved for the standard library so perhaps the
blocker is that is also has an easy syntax;
Being an operator it brings many new questions such as
precedence, syntax compatibility, whereas if it was a compiler
intrinsic like __mapTuple (very bad name) the quantity of debate
would be less perhaps?
Possibly it could remain "niche" and with loud syntax and we
would still gain the compile-time improvements.