Discuss conditional copy construction with new template trickery

DRAFT.md

@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ should not be considered in isolation.
 ### Changes in R4
 
 * Use constraints to require that the object owned by `indirect` is
-  copy-constructible. This ensures that `std::is_copy_constructible_v` does not
+  copy constructible. This ensures that `std::is_copy_constructible_v` does not
   give misleading results.
 
 * Modify comparison of `indirect` allow comparsion of valueless objects.
@@ -1560,27 +1560,21 @@ Both `indirect` and `polymorphic` support incomplete types. Support for an
 incomplete type requires deferring the instantiation of functions with
 requirements until they are used.
 
-For example, the default constructor of `indirect` requires that `T` is default
-constructible. We can't write this constraint as a requirement on `T` because
+The default constructor of `indirect` requires that `T` is default
+constructible. We cannot write this constraint as a requirement on `T` because
 that would require `T` to be a complete type at class instantiation time.
 Instead we write the constraint as a requirement on a deduced type `TT` to defer
 evaluation of the constraint until the default constructor is instantiated.
 
 ```c++
 template <typename TT = T>
-indirect() requires std::is_default_constructible_v<TT>;
+indirect() requires is_default_constructible_v<TT>;
 ```
 
 We can use this technique to write constraints on the default constructor of
 `indirect` and `polymorphic`. Both `indirect` and `polymorphic` are
 conditionally default constructible.
 
-The same technique cannot be used for the copy or move constructor of `indirect`
-because the copy or move constructor cannot be a template. We make `indirect`
-unconditionally copy and move constructible. This could be relaxed in a future
-version of the C++ standard, as a non-breaking change, if it was possible to
-defer the instantiation of the copy or move constructor.
-
 The same technique cannot be used for the copy or move constructor of
 `polymorphic` because that would require type information on an open set of
 erased types, which is not possible: a `polymorphic` object can contain any type
@@ -1589,6 +1583,27 @@ such types are copy constructible. We make `polymorphic` unconditionally copy
 and move constructible. The authors do not envisage that this could be relaxed
 in a future version of the C++ standard.
 
+While a copy constructor cannot be a template, in C++20 and later we can
+conditionally constrain copy construction of `indirect` by defining:
+
+```c++
+indirect(const indirect& other) requires false = delete;
+
+template <typename TT = T>
+indirect(const indirect& other) requires is_copy_constructible_v<TT>;
+```
+
+An instantiation of the function template with `TT=T` is added to the overload
+set when `indirect` is copy-constructed and will be selected if the owned object
+type `T` is copy constructible. This would make copy construction conditional
+for `indirect` but not for `polymorphic`. We opt for consistency and make copy
+construction unconditional for both `indirect` and `polymorphic`. Making
+`indirect` conditionally copy constructible in a future version of the C++
+standard would require adding a template function as above and would be an ABI
+break. It might be simpler to add new types for non-copyable `indirect` and
+`polymorphic` objects, although we do not propose the addition of such types in
+this draft.
+
 ### Implicit conversions
 
 We decided that there should be no implicit conversion of a value `T` to an