Updated FAQ (markdown)

FAQ.md

@@ -54,6 +54,14 @@ The syntax is slightly more verbose in that you have to explicitly convert the `
 
 2 conversions.  Roughly twice as fast!  And the code generation (using clang++ -O3) is roughly half the size:  152 assembly statements vs 335 assembly statements.
 
+Finally, one can take advantage of the fact that the conversion from `sys_days` to `year_month_day` can be made implicitly, and so one can further simplify the syntax (this change does not impact code generation):
+
+    year_month_day
+    get_meeting_date(year y, month m)
+    {
+        return sys_days{Tuesday[3]/m/y} + days{1};
+    }
+
 This philosophy is similar to that which we have for containers:  It would be super easy to create `vector<T>::push_front(const T&)`.  But that would make it too easy for programmers to write inefficient code.  The compiler helps remind the programmer that perhaps `deque<T>` or `list<T>` would be a better choice when he attempts to code with `vector<T>::push_front(const T&)`.
 
 It would be very easy to add `T& list<T>::operator[](size_t index)`.  But that would encourage the programmer to use `list<T>` when a random-access container would probably be more appropriate for the task.