New names - 2.068 roundup

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

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.