s/TypeTuple/AliasSeq/g?

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 21 October 2015 at 15:21:14 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
> I won't repeat the objections against your arguments, as it 
> leads to nothing. But this discussion again shows that the 
> renaming of TypeTuple to AliasSeq was just done for the sake of 
> it (as further witnessed by the way it was done). We shouldn't 
> do more of that nonsense as long as there is no consistent 
> concept and goal behind it.

The renaming was done in an attempt to fix a particularly bad 
name that has caused a lot of confusion. The result is another 
bad name that's likely to create confusion for different reasons. 
As to whether we're better or worse off, I don't know.

Regardless, we're not normally renaming stuff like this anymore. 
It was just done in this case, because TypeTuple was almost 
universally reviled, and Walter and Andrei agreed that it was bad 
enough that it needed changing. So, issues like this aren't 
likely to be a common occurrence at this point. Still, it would 
have been nice if we could have come up with a name for 
TypeTuple/AliasSeq that was actually good...

- Jonathan M Davis