DIP54 : revamp of Phobos tuple types

[Dicebot]

On Monday, 23 December 2013 at 02:46:40 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> This DIP makes several unfounded assumptions. It assumes that 
> the semantics of template argument lists are inherently hard to 
> learn,

Hard? No. Complicated - yes, I see wrong assumptions being made 
all the time. But this is language failure and is not directly 
related to this DIP.

> and that removing the auto-expanding aspect will make them 
> easier to learn.

I don't say that. I say that it will allow to avoid introduction 
of _third_ tuple type into Phobos which would have makes things 
even harder to learn.

> claims that it enables previously impossible algorithms.

Algorithm that operates on variadic amount of template argument 
lists can't be expressed with TypeTuple behavior.

> It claims to be a compromise derived from several previous 
> discussions (without citing any),

That I admit of my failure but I was not able to find discussions 
in archive in time. I will do it and add those as links 
eventually.

> I hate to say this, but it looks a lot like your personal 
> agenda against auto-expanding lists is tacked onto and 
> conflated with the naming problem, which I think is 
> disingenuous.

Well, if you will actually find those threads, you will see that 
I was in favor of auto-expanding behavior ;) It was Andrei who 
has convinced me.

> I don't agree. I think we'd be in good shape just by fixing the 
> naming problem, which is a much less controversial change.

We can't afford to add even more "tuple" types in library.

> Please don't pull the argument-by-authority card. Private 
> conversations that affect all of us like this need to die in a 
> fire. We should consider this kind of thing the equivalent of 
> tainted evidence.

I am merely implying that this is not yet another random DIP that 
will hang for eternity and that this discussion will have some 
practical consequences in very nearby future, whatever the final 
outcome is.