Timothy Lochner

I like the use of explicit std::move to specify intent at the callsite. I'd love the same for std::copy, as in: a = std::copy(b). Right now my containers/etc have a copy_from method with implicit copies disabled, but I'm sure I could engineer something trivial for this.

I disagree, but not because you're not right with the intent, but because that's not what std::move() is for. std::move() is an artifact of the language semantics (rvalues vs rvalue references). Move semantics are non obvious and implicit in most cases

You are not specifying the intent at the call site because in most cases explicitly moving an lvalue is a bug or a potential bug. For example: return std::move(foo); // RVO broken, you just converted a noop into a move Foo foo; f(std::move(foo)); // foo still alive, but broken