>  > If you really think that having such costless options would be useful,
>  > it is the time to make pressure to have them included in the merger.
>
> "Could we have costless options please, if it's REALLY not going to
> complicate the compiler too much?"

I don't really have an opinion on "costless options", but it is worth noting
that including them is going to change the runtime's data representation,
undoubtedly breaking many people's C-interfacing code (unless they use
CamlIDL, I guess).

--FAC