Johel Ernesto Guerrero Peña

What concerns me is correctness with respect to how the operations are done directly on the underlying types. Someone upgrading their code from `int`s to `unit`s will find change in...

By forcing `rhs`'s type to be that of `lhs`'s (underlying type), such defaults are being intervened with.

All `rhs`s that have type `detail::type_identity_t` and `typename UnitTypeLhs::underlying_type`.

I had thought about it, and people `using namespace units::literals;` for the UDLs might find themselves having undesired clashes or accidentally using these kind of "constant literals". However, I haven't...

Yeah. `literals` might be good enough most of the time.

#256 removes the abbreviation-named tags.

#212 blocks a general solution for this.

Alternatively, `dB` should be pluralized, like how all other units were renamed (I don't know if there are others). Then `dB` would be freed up for this.

Right. Let's leave non-linear scales off this.

Well, it should be easy to implement, given that only arithmetic types are supported at the moment.