Not coalescing around None-aware

Duck typing is perhaps an appropriate convenience for Python, a language for non-programmers, but what happens is we're polluting a namespace. Having a bark() method does *not* mean you bark "like a dog" but once this unstated assumption takes hold everybody is stuck with it.

This pollution has become pretty bad in C++ where on top of about 100 reserved words like "for" and "reinterpret_cast" and "co_await" there are a vast number of in practice unavailable identifier names which, if you make the mistake of using them, implicitly mark the affected type as having specific properties associated with that word e.g. cbegin() means you're able to provide a constant iterator, size() means you're some container with things inside it. Even though C++ doesn't "Have" duck typing in this respect in practice that's what it does.

Better, I am confident, to be able to state explicitly what you mean, if this Lyre Bird can in fact smurf::animal-noises::Dog::bark that's fine, but it shouldn't be confused with my tialaramex::army::DrillSergeant::bark which is provided neither by Lyre Birds nor Dogs. We need to be clear what is meant.

core::cmp::Ordering and core::sync::atomic::Ordering are both really, really important, but in their own context. Just because my sort method needs an Ordering and your spinlock code has an Ordering doesn't mean they're concerned with the same thing. If the two are in adjacent code, that code needs to spell out what's going on. In unrelated code, the expectation can be stated just once and then context is clear afterwards.