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.
All those tuples are already not the same as tuples as defined from
other languages. So all three explanations are going to confuse some
people. I don't think we can come up with a name that doesn't confuse
some set of people.
This issue of naming this one thing is so long in the tooth, we need to
just move on IMO.
-Steve
