New names - 2.068 roundup

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d]

On 6/24/15 5:06 PM, deadalnix wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 June 2015 at 20:56:31 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> First, very good initiative.
>>
>> I'd like to raise concern about the Arguments name in std.meta . That
>> is not the first time I do so, but this still needs to change.
>>
>> Arguments is not a good name. In the very example from the std.meta
>> doc, Arguments is used as parameter and not as argument. I think this
>> is naming failure just right there.
>>
>> It can also be used as argument. It can be used as parameter. It can
>> be used to build tuple. It can probably be used in way that haven't
>> been invented yet.
>>
>> Naming that thing after one of its use is a bad idea. It is generally
>> a bad idea as future use of the concept tends to not conform with the
>> original name and everything becomes confused.
>>
>> In that specific case, it is not even future uses that will be non
>> conformant, it is current use in the very documentation that is.
>>
>> I discussed various names with many at DConf. The name that seemed to
>> be, if not preferred by all, the one that nobody had any strong reason
>> to be against is Sequence. Can we use that ?
>
> Also, I'm not sure why TypeTuple is introduced in std.meta "for legacy
> compatibility" as the module is brand new.

std.meta was moved from std.typetuple, and it now publicly imports std.meta.

-Steve