s/TypeTuple/AliasSeq/g?

[Marc Schütz via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 21 October 2015 at 04:49:14 UTC, Shriramana Sharma 
wrote:
> 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?

That's because it refers to the first argument, which is one 
symbol, not multiple ones. "consistsOfExpression" would probably 
be nicer, but - meh...

> When renaming `isExpressionsTuple`, I would think it more 
> appropriate to have "isExpressionSeq" since it's an `AliasSeq` 
> containing only expressions and no types.

This should not be renamed, because an AliasSeq that consists 
only of expressions _is_ a tuple.

>
> 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",

We aren't. The only reason we use "AliasSeq" at all instead of 
"AliasTuple" was that some people insisted they were not tuples. 
This does however not apply to all the other things that _are_ 
tuples. Renaming those would only make matters worse.