On 7/15/15 9:54 AM, rsw0x wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 13:47:21 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 7/15/15 9:28 AM, Deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 08:29:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
[...]
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.
To repeat what I already said, the issue is not the name but the
documentation.
How many here have read the page on tuples?
http://dlang.org/tuple.html
Give it a read through and tell me you aren't confused as hell.
That document needs to be rewritten. I don't consider it part of the
spec per-se, but it's definitely out of date.
-Steve
