s/TypeTuple/AliasSeq/g?

[Shriramana Sharma via Digitalmars-d]

deadalnix wrote:

> We should weed these out over time. Not really remove them, as to
> not break old code, but just create new names for these and
> remove old name from the doc and all.

Working on this right now...

BTW "isExpressions" – what kind of singular/plural grammar is that? When 
renaming `isExpressionsTuple`, I would think it more appropriate to have 
"isExpressionSeq" since it's an `AliasSeq` containing only expressions and 
no types.

Also, though `AliasSeq` is the same as `TypeTuple`, it would seem 
`isTypeTuple` is not the same as what an `isAliasSeq` would be, since  
`isTypeTuple` seems to test for an `AliasSeq` containing only types and no 
expressions. Possibly this inconsistency is one of the reasons for the name 
change?

Anyhow, given that we are removing all references to "tuple", I would think 
"isTypeSeq" would be the appropriate parallel renaming of `isTypeTuple` to 
"isExpressionSeq".

But should there then be a separate `isAliasSeq`? I'm not sure how to do 
that. Code is appreciated...

-- 
Shriramana Sharma, Penguin #395953