Note that when you define smart pointer types C++ there is indeed a difference between `.` and `*` resp. `->`: the latter are typically overloaded to operate on the underlying pointer type whereas the former operates on the smart pointer class itself (e.g. calling `reset` on a `std::unique_ptr`). Not sure how you would do that with a single dereference operator.
It would have to have been designed to use external functions instead (eg spelled std::reset), which might even make the API more consistent since many accessor functions already require doing just that (eg std::begin)
Free functions like `std::begin` are meant for generic code. Apart from that, how would you even access the private members if the dot-operator was overloaded? (C++ does not support overloading the dot-operator for good reasons.)
Also with some function, perhaps even the existing one std::get<1>, like for some other existing types where the dot-operator is already broken. The special purpose field-access ability and the special-purpose dot syntax don’t have to the same exact operator, though I appreciate there were logical reasons for C++ to historically choose to combine them
