[ranges] Format of `&&` expression

There are currently two styles for the formatting of long logic expressions, that is, && is at the end:

  template<input_­range V, forward_­range Pattern>
    requires view<V> && view<Pattern> &&
             indirectly_­comparable<iterator_t<V>, iterator_t<Pattern>, ranges::equal_to> &&
             (forward_­range<V> || tiny-range<Pattern>)
  class lazy_split_view;

or front:

  template<input_range V, forward_range Pattern>
    requires view<V> && input_range<range_reference_t<V>>
          && view<Pattern>
          && compatible-joinable-ranges<range_reference_t<V>, Pattern>
  class join_with_view;

Is it necessary to unify the format, or is such change not worth much?

Start by comparing the two requires-clause formatting examples in the issue and inspect nearby draft formatting conventions. No file or test is named, so the work first requires deciding whether a unified placement rule is worthwhile; done means the style question is resolved and any accepted convention is applied consistently.