So AliasSeq = Tuples?
On Tuesday, 7 July 2015 at 22:22:02 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/7/2015 2:20 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Tuesday, 7 July 2015 at 21:15:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
So I thought we were supposed to replace bad names with good
names. Template
arguments are indexable, so "sequence"
On 07/23/2015 10:42 AM, deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 July 2015 at 04:44:48 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/22/2015 12:53 AM, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 21:26:24 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 16:54:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Because, among other things,
On Thursday, 23 July 2015 at 15:03:24 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/23/2015 10:42 AM, deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 July 2015 at 04:44:48 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/22/2015 12:53 AM, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 21:26:24 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 23:27:03 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 23:06:51 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Facts are not oppinions. Deal with it.
It is fact that some people found the name TypeTuple confusing,
nothing else.
You have the opinion that tuple should disqualify the
On Wednesday, 22 July 2015 at 04:44:48 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/22/2015 12:53 AM, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 21:26:24 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 16:54:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Because, among other things, it auto-expands.
T
1) .tupleof
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Some of the proposals do not even make any sense. Come on, all
people that got into this know how newcomer react to the Tuple
name noticed the same reaction. Yet, there is a large crow of
idiots (sorry if you are in that crowd, on that
On 07/22/2015 12:53 AM, deadalnix wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 21:26:24 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 16:54:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Because, among other things, it auto-expands.
T
1) .tupleof auto-expands and changing it at this point would cause
epic
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 04:06:11PM +, Zoadian via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Some of the proposals do not even make any sense. Come on, all people
that got into this know how newcomer react to the Tuple name noticed
the same reaction.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 05:55:41PM +, Zoadian via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 16:54:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 04:06:11PM +, Zoadian via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
i get that TypeTuple is confusing as it is not _limited_ to types,
but why is
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 16:54:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 04:06:11PM +, Zoadian via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Some of the proposals do not even make any sense. Come on,
all people that got into this know how
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 06:23:25PM +, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 18:15:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I wish we would just call it Zxkuqyb and let it rest already.
If we're going to do something like that, why not go for the geek cred
and go for
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 07:13:08 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
I expect others here to grow up a bit
Yet, there is a large crow of idiots (sorry if you are in that
crowd, on that one you ARE an idiot)
You trolling right now?
I
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 18:32:26 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 06:23:25PM +, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 18:15:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I wish we would just call it Zxkuqyb and let it rest already.
If we're going to do
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 18:15:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I wish we would just call it Zxkuqyb and let it rest already.
If we're going to do something like that, why not go for the geek
cred and go for XYZZY? ;)
For every argument for something, there is always an equal and
opposite
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 16:54:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Because, among other things, it auto-expands.
T
1) .tupleof auto-expands and changing it at this point would
cause epic breakage.(I also see no reason to.)
2) Even the tuple in std.typecons has a manual .expand property,
i.e.
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 19:00:18 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 18:32:26 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 06:23:25PM +, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 18:15:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I wish we would just
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 21:26:24 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 16:54:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Because, among other things, it auto-expands.
T
1) .tupleof auto-expands and changing it at this point would
cause epic breakage.(I also see no reason to.)
This is
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 08:00:40 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Come on, all people that got into this know how newcomer react
to the Tuple name noticed the same reaction.
No, that highly depends on the background of the newcomer,
everyone
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 07:13:08 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
I expect others here to grow up a bit
Yet, there is a large crow of idiots (sorry if you are in that
crowd, on that one you ARE an idiot)
You trolling right now?
I'm
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 22:25:22 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
I'm not. I would certainly have put this in a nicer manner
given different circumstance, and certainly should have. But
the point remains.
There are facts. Fact is, several persons reported that actual,
real life newcomer are
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 22:58:27 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
All the poll shows is what people like(or hate the least),
Walter and Andrei can interpret that how ever they wish. I am
not arguing for or against any of the names(they all suck).
We get it, you think tuple is a bad name, you keep
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 23:06:51 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Facts are not oppinions. Deal with it.
It is fact that some people found the name TypeTuple confusing,
nothing else.
You have the opinion that tuple should disqualify the name
AliasTuple, some clearly dont agree with that.
Why is
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:27:01PM +, Tofu Ninja via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 23:06:51 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Facts are not oppinions. Deal with it.
It is fact that some people found the name TypeTuple confusing,
nothing else.
You have the opinion that tuple
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 14:58:34 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 08:18:46 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:05:20 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Here is a survey of all suggested names, please vote so we
can end this with the best name...
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 08:00:40 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Come on, all people that got into this know how newcomer react
to the Tuple name noticed the same reaction.
No, that highly depends on the background of the newcomer,
everyone
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
Come on, all people that got into this know how newcomer react
to the Tuple name noticed the same reaction.
No, that highly depends on the background of the newcomer,
everyone I introduced D to , only found it confusing that it was
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 16:54:55 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/20/15 11:54 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Andrei/Walter should just step in and make the final call on
whatever
lousy name they wish (let's admit it, none of the names are
any good,
and you ain't gonna please
On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 06:49:10 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
I expect others here to grow up a bit
Yet, there is a large crow of idiots (sorry if you are in that
crowd, on that one you ARE an idiot)
You trolling right now?
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:05:20 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Here is a survey of all suggested names, please vote so we can
end this with the best name...
http://goo.gl/forms/qls1ZGDCho
Small update, as of right now, there has been 45 responses to the
survey, with AliasTuple in the lead.
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 21:02:51 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/15/2015 1:13 AM, 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
Does this mean that complaining about the
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 08:18:46 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:05:20 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Here is a survey of all suggested names, please vote so we can
end this with the best name...
http://goo.gl/forms/qls1ZGDCho
Small update, as of right now, there has been
On 7/20/15 4:18 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:05:20 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Here is a survey of all suggested names, please vote so we can end
this with the best name...
http://goo.gl/forms/qls1ZGDCho
Small update, as of right now, there has been 45 responses to the
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 13:09:06 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/20/15 4:18 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:05:20 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Here is a survey of all suggested names, please vote so we
can end
this with the best name...
http://goo.gl/forms/qls1ZGDCho
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 13:09:06 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/20/15 4:18 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:05:20 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Here is a survey of all suggested names, please vote so we
can end
this with the best name...
http://goo.gl/forms/qls1ZGDCho
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 08:18:46 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:05:20 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Here is a survey of all suggested names, please vote so we can
end this with the best name...
http://goo.gl/forms/qls1ZGDCho
Small update, as of right now, there has been
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 16:26:36 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 15:33:17 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
The ones against a name are vocal in the thread, the ones who
don't mind it or like it tend to not be as vocal. The thread
is not a good representation of what people
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 15:33:17 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
The ones against a name are vocal in the thread, the ones who
don't mind it or like it tend to not be as vocal. The thread is
not a good representation of what people like.
Neither is a superficial popularity contest a suitable
On 7/20/15 11:54 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Andrei/Walter should just step in and make the final call on whatever
lousy name they wish (let's admit it, none of the names are any good,
and you ain't gonna please everybody no matter what), and let's just
move on.
That's what we did
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 03:33:14PM +, Tofu Ninja via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 14:58:34 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Whatever it means, the answers there don't seem to jive with the
thread discussing it. In particular, AliasTuple probably has the
strongest reaction
On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 14:58:34 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Whatever it means, the answers there don't seem to jive with
the thread discussing it. In particular, AliasTuple probably
has the strongest reaction against it out of any of the choices
which have been seriously considered, based
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:32:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine
On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 21:32:59 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine with
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:32:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:32:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:32:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 02:07:42 UTC, Brad Anderson wrote:
(I haven't read any of this thread because I'm exhausted with
this topic so just ignore me if you guys have already rehashed
and dismissed Seq. I don't care enough about the outcome
anymore to fight for it.)
It has been
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:44:27 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:32:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
[...]
_Please_ no. It'll just make it extra confusing whether you're
talking about what was TypeTuple or just aliases in general.
That's why I've never
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:59:41 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:54:31PM -0700, Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 7/7/2015 2:16 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
So I thought we were supposed to replace bad names with good
names. Template arguments are indexable, so
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:32:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 02:36:59 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote:
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:35:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases
Then you have the confusion about whether you're talking about
the
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 23:54:30 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 15:50:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/15/15 8:49 PM, Mike wrote:
1. AliasSeq is no good as evident from the first post that
started
this thread
I am egging my face for starting this. Can we please
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 15:50:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/15/15 8:49 PM, Mike wrote:
1. AliasSeq is no good as evident from the first post that
started
this thread
I am egging my face for starting this. Can we please return to
AliasSeq? -- Andrei
I'm good with that. As
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 15:50:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/15/15 8:49 PM, Mike wrote:
1. AliasSeq is no good as evident from the first post that
started
this thread
I am egging my face for starting this. Can we please return to
AliasSeq? -- Andrei
What about the Pack name?
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 08:57:26 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 15:50:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/15/15 8:49 PM, Mike wrote:
1. AliasSeq is no good as evident from the first post that
started
this thread
I am egging my face for starting this. Can we
On 17-Jul-2015 12:52, Matthias Bentrup wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 09:13:13 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 08:57:26 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 15:50:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/15/15 8:49 PM, Mike wrote:
1. AliasSeq is no good as
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 10:15:05 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 00:08:42 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Well this was 214 replies of wasted time...
Just b/c the outcome is the same doesn't mean the discussion
was pointless.
We reached at least some sort of consensus which
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 10:15:05 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 00:08:42 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Well this was 214 replies of wasted time...
Just b/c the outcome is the same doesn't mean the discussion
was pointless.
We reached at least some sort of consensus which
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 09:13:13 UTC, Daniel N wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 08:57:26 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 15:50:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/15/15 8:49 PM, Mike wrote:
1. AliasSeq is no good as evident from the first post that
started
this
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 00:08:42 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
Well this was 214 replies of wasted time...
Just b/c the outcome is the same doesn't mean the discussion was
pointless.
We reached at least some sort of consensus which should prevent
any future complaints about the chosen name.
On 7/16/15 8:08 PM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 23:54:30 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 15:50:15 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/15/15 8:49 PM, Mike wrote:
1. AliasSeq is no good as evident from the first post that started
this thread
I am egging my
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 21:44:37 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/15/2015 05:35 PM, Dicebot wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 15:29:25 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
It doesn't confuse me. We have type tuples and expression
tuples defined
in the spec. An alias tuple can have both
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:35:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases
Then you have the confusion about whether you're talking about
the replacement of TypeTuple or just aliases in general -
especially if
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:35:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Then you have the confusion about whether you're talking about
the replacement of TypeTuple or just aliases in general -
especially if verbal conversation. AliasSeq won't be confused
with anything.
- Jonathan M Davis
That's
On 7/7/2015 2:16 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
So I thought we were supposed to replace bad names with good names. Template
arguments are indexable, so sequence doesn't quite apply.
What happened? Why are we replacing a crappy term with another crappy term?
Should just be Aliases. I recall
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 00:20:23 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Please no, Aliases is one of the worst names in the thread.
Here is a survey of all suggested names, please vote so we can
end this with the best name...
http://goo.gl/forms/qls1ZGDCho
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:32:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:54:31PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 7/7/2015 2:16 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
So I thought we were supposed to replace bad names with good names.
Template arguments are indexable, so sequence doesn't quite apply.
What happened? Why are we
On 7/15/2015 1:13 AM, 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
Does this mean that complaining about the names I pick is going to die down? :-)
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine with Aliases with
an extra umph that the BDFL favors it. -- Andrei
On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 01:32:45 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/17/15 8:20 PM, Mike wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Should just be Aliases.
I'd be happy to do the pull request if you wish.
Let's get the +1s on this - please reply. I'm fine
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I recall that my naming of setExt() was universally panned
for using an abbreviation.
No, it was because the abbreviation was the sole distinction from
another function's name.
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/7/2015 2:16 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
So I thought we were supposed to replace bad names with good
names. Template
arguments are indexable, so sequence doesn't quite apply.
What happened? Why are we replacing a crappy
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 21:22:00 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 20:54:33 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
I recall that my naming of setExt() was universally panned
for using an abbreviation.
No, it was because the abbreviation was the sole distinction
from another
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 16:13:46 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 7/16/15 11:59 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:50:25AM -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 7/15/15 8:49 PM, Mike wrote:
1. AliasSeq is no good as evident from the first
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 17:10:57 UTC, Deadalnix wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 05:44:29 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
Oh, here is one more term you can consider:
AliasPack
In Python splatting is called unpacking (splat refers to
the visual impression of the * operator and is
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 17:39:13 UTC, David Nadlinger wrote:
Yes, me. ;)
(I should note that this is mainly because I'd really rather not
have Tuple in the name because of first-hand experience in
teaching beginners both on IRC and in person. And AliasSeq seems
like the most likely
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 21:44:13 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/16/2015 07:35 AM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
But I think sequence implies that everything has the same
type...
That common type is 'alias'. :-)
*cringe*
On 2015-07-15 23:44, Timon Gehr wrote:
It should instead be acknowledged that there /should/ be no difference
in what three things can be passed to X(T...) and X(alias a, alias b,
alias c). The X(T...) if(T.length==k) pattern is ridiculous.
I completely agree.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2015-07-07 23:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
So I thought we were supposed to replace bad names with good names.
Template arguments are indexable, so sequence doesn't quite apply.
What happened? Why are we replacing a crappy term with another crappy term?
How about Bag or AliasBag?
--
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 05:55:01 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 05:51:01 UTC, Mike wrote:
Sound familiar? I propose simply Pack.
Or AliasListPack, AliasPackList, PackedAliasList…
Or would it be UnpackingAliasList or UnpackedAliasList? Oh…
Headaches…
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 05:51:01 UTC, Mike wrote:
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 05:44:29 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
C++ also have related use of the word pack:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/parameter_pack
Nice! From the description:
A template parameter pack is a
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 08:00:43 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
Maybe auto-flattening is a better name for this behaviour?
flattening: concatenating all the children recursively.
argument unpacking/expansion: filling in the actual parameters
Anyway, auto-flattening is undesirable as it makes
On 2015-07-16 10:00, Marc =?UTF-8?B?U2Now7x0eiI=?= schue...@gmx.net
wrote:
What I meant is that there is no equivalent to the behaviour of TypeTuples:
assert(is(TypeTuple!(int, float, TypeTuple!(string, int)) ==
TypeTuple!(int, float, string, int));
TypeTuple!(int,
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 21:44:37 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
It should instead be acknowledged that there /should/ be no
difference in what three things can be passed to X(T...) and
X(alias a, alias b, alias c). The X(T...) if(T.length==k)
pattern is ridiculous.
I am all for that but it
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 07:30:19 UTC, Mike wrote:
I know Ola is making light of this situation and many of you
find this discussion beneath you, but we need a name, and with
the release looming we need it relatively soon.
Naming is difficult, but list and pack (alluding to
unpacking)
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 08:00:43 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
My point is that there is no type in Ruby that is inherently
splatty, rather it's the operator that produces this
behaviour. Therefore, splat is not used as a noun to signify
such a type.
Yes, please forget about the
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 05:51:01 UTC, Mike wrote:
A template parameter pack is a template parameter that accepts
zero or more template arguments (non-types, types, or
templates). A function parameter pack is a function parameter
that accepts zero or more function arguments.
A template
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 21:44:37 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
It should instead be acknowledged that there /should/ be no
difference in what three things can be passed to X(T...) and
X(alias a, alias b, alias c). The X(T...) if(T.length==k)
pattern is ridiculous.
+1
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 07:14:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
array: run-time indexable bag
Eh... not bag, bag often means value semantics without identity...
array: run-time indexable collection of entities.
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 06:32:15 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
How about Bag or AliasBag?
Blob :)
An object, especially a large one, having no distinct shape or
definition
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 06:32:15 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2015-07-07 23:16, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
So I thought we were supposed to replace bad names with good
names.
Template arguments are indexable, so sequence doesn't quite
apply.
What happened? Why are we replacing a crappy
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 05:51:01 UTC, Mike wrote:
C++ also have related use of the word pack:
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/parameter_pack
I propose simply Pack.
I know Ola is making light of this situation and many of you find
this discussion beneath you, but we need a
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 19:52:39 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2015-07-15 18:09, Marc =?UTF-8?B?U2Now7x0eiI=?=
schue...@gmx.net wrote:
Yeah, splat as a name for an auto-expanding thingy would be
a novelty.
Ruby for instance doesn't have anything like that, it has a
splat
_operator_
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015 at 21:44:37 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
It should instead be acknowledged that there /should/ be no
difference in what three things can be passed to X(T...) and
X(alias a, alias b, alias c). The X(T...) if(T.length==k)
pattern is ridiculous.
Yes, that would immediately
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 10:19:11 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
I am all for that but it needs to be explicitly acknowledged
and implemented together with a rename.
There is no renaming involved here, as the issue concerns the
alias parameter language constructs. Or are you suggesting using
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 06:33:00 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2015-07-15 23:44, Timon Gehr wrote:
It should instead be acknowledged that there /should/ be no
difference
in what three things can be passed to X(T...) and X(alias a,
alias b,
alias c). The X(T...) if(T.length==k) pattern
On Thursday, 16 July 2015 at 14:38:09 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
I mean that if name AliasSomething goes to 2.068, matching
change to compiler argument lists must land in same release -
and there must be a change log entry connecting and explaining
those two.
I disagree with that. These aren't
1 - 100 of 294 matches
Mail list logo
