On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 06:49 AM, Shriramana Sharma wrote: > BTW "isExpressions" – what kind of singular/plural grammar is that? When > renaming `isExpressionsTuple`, I would think it more appropriate to have > "isExpressionSeq" since it's an `AliasSeq` containing only expressions and > no types.
Makes sense to me. However, the similar name "isExpressionTuple" has apparently been dropped in favor of "isExpressions" in the past. Maybe dig up the discussion on that. > 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? Yup. > Anyhow, given that we are removing all references to "tuple", I would > think "isTypeSeq" would be the appropriate parallel renaming of > `isTypeTuple` to "isExpressionSeq". If "isExpressionSeq" gets through, yes. If "isExpressions" stays, then "isTypes"? :/ > But should there then be a separate `isAliasSeq`? I'm not sure how to do > that. Code is appreciated... I don't think an isAliasSeq template makes sense. Every set of template arguments is an AliasSeq, so isAliasSeq would just always return true. There's no point in that.
