Wait, what? What is AliasSeq?

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 16:54:55 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 7/20/15 11:54 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> Andrei/Walter should just step in and make the final call on 
>> whatever
>> lousy name they wish (let's admit it, none of the names are 
>> any good,
>> and you ain't gonna please everybody no matter what), and 
>> let's just
>> move on.
>
> That's what we did a few times in the past. It did help with 
> limiting discussions and revisionist pull requests, but not as 
> much as anyone would have liked.
>
> It seems to me that subjecting new names to some community 
> scrutiny before freezing them forever is a sensible thing to 
> do. The difficulties are finding good definitions for 
> "community" and "scrutiny". And "some" :o). From what I can 
> tell:
>
> * For any name considered, there is at least one person who 
> strongly believes is an epically bad choice and presents vivid 
> anecdotes, similes, and parallels with other languages and 
> domains to support that opinion.
>
> * For most names considered, there is at least one person who 
> is a strong advocate and is convinced that's by far a better 
> choice than all others.
>
> * Whatever choice we make, there's a sort of atmosphere that a 
> radically better name is just around the corner and we'll all 
> regret having freezing it.
>
> * There's a sort of Warhol effect in that naming discussions 
> are massive, therefore they must be important, therefore they 
> garner attention, therefore they get more massive.
>
> I had vague hopes some clarity would emerge from opening up the 
> process. Sadly this is one of those "welcome to the club" 
> results. What I do hope happens is more appreciation of all 
> involved of the difficulty of making decisions and judgment 
> calls in matters in which there's no telling right from wrong. 
> Please, please, please cut Walter and me some slack in the 
> future.
>
> I'll talk to him today in the hope we'll be able to put an end 
> to this.
>
>
> Andrei

Well, this time you did the exact reverse.

Consensus is reached, Andrei step in, we got 20 pages of 
bikesched to end up to square one, at which stage, Walter step in 
and put more coin into the jukebox.

Conclusion had been reached twice, and twice with the same name 
already. I feel like there is a kernel of people that just won't 
accept this, as the poll showed (I did not vote).

At some point, one have to accept that his proposal is not the 
one that will get in. My preference would go for Pack, then 
Splat, then Seq, but at this point I have to admit that the 
community does not share my taste. I expect others here to grow 
up a bit and accept that YOUR proposal is not gold platted, in 
fact, it is kind of shitty like all other proposal here. Deal 
with it.

Some of the proposals do not even make any sense. Come on, all 
people that got into this know how newcomer react to the Tuple 
name noticed the same reaction. Yet, there is a large crow of 
idiots (sorry if you are in that crowd, on that one you ARE an 
idiot) that will send that proposal in again and again. Anyone 
that proposed that name at this point should only be laughed at, 
as it is clearly the manifestation of someone that have not deal 
first hand with the problems of the historical name and is 
serving as a living example of Dunning Kruger.

Unless there is something significantly better then Seq, and that 
there is consensus on that fact it should be changed. I don't 
think any proposal, even the one I would prefer over Seq, match 
that criteria, and I don't think anything else honest here would 
either.

That is exhausting to come back here again and again just to 
argue the same point again and again. This must stop. Everybody 
else has better things to do.