Wait, what? What is AliasSeq?

[Deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 15:29:25 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 7/15/15 9:47 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On 7/15/15 9:28 AM, Deadalnix wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 08:29:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 08:13:20 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 07:50:46 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>>>>>> Good to see another bad name merged in master ^_^
>>>>>
>>>>> Yep, same feeling here....
>>>>
>>>> At this point, I think that it's simply a question of which 
>>>> bad name
>>>> we go with. None of them are particularly good, and there's 
>>>> a lot of
>>>> disagreement about almost all of them - and if there's a lot 
>>>> of
>>>> agreement, it's about how bad the name is, not how good it 
>>>> is.
>>>>
>>>> I'd be very surprised to ever get real agreement on this. 
>>>> There simply
>>>> isn't a good name for it. And if Walter and Andrei like 
>>>> AliasTuple,
>>>> it's probably going to stick (and Andrei does seem to like 
>>>> it; no idea
>>>> about Walter).
>>>>
>>>> - Jonathan M Davis
>>>
>>> Tuple is the only name where we have actual, factual 
>>> feedback. Hanging
>>> in the d irc chan for years, it is apparent that calling this 
>>> tuple
>>> confuse people. That is a fact.
>>
>> It doesn't confuse me. We have type tuples and expression 
>> tuples defined
>> in the spec. An alias tuple can have both expressions and 
>> types. It's
>> not that confusing. What was confusing is that a TypeTuple was 
>> not a
>> type tuple as defined in the spec.
>
> I agree.
>
> Andrei

It is not about you guys. Yes this as defined in the spec, for 
the most part. Still people weere confused about it. That is a 
hard fact.

At this point, the specalso say what typetuple is, and, once 
you've gone through it, you understand what it is. Yet, we 
decided to change it because everyone was confused.

There are expectation that come with names.