I’m curious about what you mean by “virality of move”. Do you mean the ubiquitous usage of these features across programming domains, despite the core team’s stated assumption that noncopyable types are a niche feature intended for only a couple key use cases?
This concept is the reason I’ve been using up space on this thread to voice my opinions despite not being someone who plans to use noncopyable types in the niche way anytime soon. I’m intrigued by the possibility of more common use cases for noncopyable types (for example, I posted this recently), and I’m worried that the syntax/feature design might be being overly influenced by the assumption that very few people will find it useful.
This idea interests me a lot. Does this mean that it can make sense to use consume on a copyable type? Because it seems possible to me that this would be the actual way to use these new features in order to replace some classes, without actually needing to use types that are themselves noncopyable.