Paulmichael Blasucci

Please see #22

I more-or-less always use explicit conversion (either `op_explicit`, `.To()`, or both) for accessing the underlying value of a wrapped primitive. This avoids the issue @cmeeren mentions. It also encourages consumers...

Personally, I appreciate having a "language of definition", which is distinct from a "language of implementation". But I'm also a kook, who wishes signature files actually drove more of the...

> There are several things wrong with that pattern :point_up: That's a _big_ understatement. :slightly_smiling_face:

> I often use single case DUs, what are the problems with that pattern ? So, there are really two aspects to this: technical and philosophical. From a purely technical...

So, recapping, there are 5 different suggestions here, each of which improves quality of life for working with units of measure: 1. Remove UoM 1. Remove UoM generically 1. Add...

This is maybe not the best place to ask, but... I have a process question: Would we "feature gate" these behind multiple different "language features"? Would we reuse one of...

@abelbraaksma wrote: > I've no problem splitting them in two RFCs, but ideally, I (or you ;) would implement the chunk in one go. I'd be happy to work on...

> I'd be happy to work on this (with Abel or solo)... assuming @cartermp or @dsyme will go ahead an mark it as approved :wink: Ping?

For what it's worth, I was recently playing around with this for something that came up at my day job. I now fully understand what @dsyme means about items 2...