Why did the `InlineArray` type sugar proposal come to review?

[John_McCall]

Moderator note: post has been partially moved

@Douglas_Gregor

@austintatious

How is it possible that in the pitch forum there was so much pushback, yet none of it was considered.

(putting my Language Steering Group-member hat on for the next part)

The review process gives leeway to the authors to propose the feature they want to see, in the form they think is best. The pitch thread flushes out issues and points of discussion, and authors are asked to address those issues that come up in the pitch thread in the proposal document before the review begins. Authors may change their minds to propose something else based on that pitch discussion, but they aren't required to: they are free to stick to their preferred syntax even if it's unpopular. The LSG asks that they provide rationale for why they proposed what they did, and why they didn't go with the various alternatives that were suggested in the pitch. This proposal document does provide rationale and alternatives, as it should.

The fact that there is a review means that this is a plausible future for the language, and has reached a point where we can have a reasonable discussion about it. It does not imply that the LSG feels strongly that the proposal will be accepted in exactly its current form. Numerous proposals have gone into review with one name/syntax and, on further discussion, have been accepted with a different name/syntax, Vector -> InlineArray being an obvious recent one.

Whether this proposal is eventually accepted, and with what syntax, will be informed by the discussion here and on the pitch thread.