This was discussed in Prague during LWG's review of the paper. LWG wasn't satisfied that numeric_limits<R>::min() and ::max() are guaranteed to be of type R for arbitrary types, given that it is entirely unclear what the requirements on user specializations are. It follows that the Mandates: isn't redundant.

Doesn't https://eel.is/c++draft/library#contents-3 prevent ADL? Or is it to allow some two-step dance as with std::swap?

The point is that we want to ban in_range<Meow>(42) even if numeric_limits<Meow>::min() is an int.

Makes sense. Thank you.