On 07/30/2015 09:39 AM, "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
<[email protected]>" wrote:
On Thursday, 30 July 2015 at 04:20:41 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
type exists in the latter system. D does not have a design that is as
principled as that of the systems you draw inspiration from.
...
Don't garble quotes like that. Thanks.
I'm not drawing inspiration from anywhere. I'm talking about how the
term "sequence"/
You talked extensively about seq.
"seq" is commonly used both in CS literature and
elsewhere: a list of related values.
...
That's basically what that comment said, modulo possibly a slight
movement of goalposts from your side now.
synonyms: «succession, order, course, series, chain, concatenation,
train, string, cycle, progression»
If you want do design a language that is pleasant to deal with you need
to be consistent and principled both when it comes to naming and to
semantics.
...
Well, D fails here.
If "sequence" is to be understood as a compile time list of random shit
with a flattening constructor
There's no flattening constructor.
and auto expansion, then you prevent
sensible and consistent use of the term in other contexts.
I have argued why it can be seen as somewhat sensible and consistent
given the constraints, and you have ignored that argument.
Anyway, this is getting tiresome, because you keep changing the specific
topic initiated in the subthreads if the original one is not defensible.
E.g. here, I was replying to the specific comment that '"alias" is not a
set of values if [sic] the same type...'.
I fully agree that "Seq" does not deal with auto-expansion.
Are you using a non-threaded interface by any chance?
Note that I don't have an agenda here. I'm not going to use any library
primitive for this that uses more than 3 characters anyway and I am not
teaching D to anyone.
