Hm, no, it sucks. &quot;I can do that with ease because I&#x27;ve done it so many times&quot; is really a terrible argument to explain why something is good. If you&#x27;ve lost a leg, walking with a crutch becomes second nature to you, but that doesn&#x27;t mean that&#x27;s the preferred or most efficient way of walking for the human being.<p>Yes, you know by heart that all_of requires &quot;foo.begin()&quot; and  &quot;foo.end()&quot; and the capture context &quot;[]&quot;, but it doesn&#x27;t negate the fact that many other, better languages, just know how to cycle an array without having to specify begin and end, know how to capture arguments when needed, don&#x27;t require a useless (in this context) return, nor clutter a single line of code with nine differenct gibberish symbols like  &quot;(&quot;, &quot;)&quot;, &quot;::&quot;, &quot;,&quot;, &quot;[]&quot;, &quot;;&quot; &quot;{&quot;, &quot;}&quot;.<p>Take the ultra humble javascript: foo.every(a =&gt; a % 2)<p>When you need three times the characters to obtain the same result, and those charcters are a clusterfuck, it is not relevant if years of usage made <i>you</i> comfortable <i>nonetheless</i> with it.