s/TypeTuple/AliasSeq/g?

[anonymous via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 06:49 AM, Shriramana Sharma wrote:

> 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.

Makes sense to me. However, the similar name "isExpressionTuple" has 
apparently been dropped in favor of "isExpressions" in the past. Maybe dig 
up the discussion on that.

> 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?

Yup.

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

If "isExpressionSeq" gets through, yes. If "isExpressions" stays, then 
"isTypes"? :/

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

I don't think an isAliasSeq template makes sense. Every set of template 
arguments is an AliasSeq, so isAliasSeq would just always return true. 
There's no point in that.