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 replacing a crappy term with another crappy term?
> 
> Should just be "Aliases". I recall that my naming of "setExt()" was universally panned for using an abbreviation. "Aliases" doesn't carry any baggage about how it might be accessed.

Wow, the bikeshedding truly never ends!


T

-- 
Дерево держится корнями, а человек - друзьями.

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 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:

> 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 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 "+1"s 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 "+1"s on this - please reply. I'm fine with Aliases with an extra umph that the BDFL favors it. -- Andrei

+1

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 term with another crappy term?
>
> Should just be "Aliases". I recall that my naming of "setExt()" was universally panned for using an abbreviation. "Aliases" doesn't carry any baggage about how it might be accessed.

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

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 function's name.

Yeah. As long as abbreviations are reasonably clear they're actually a _good_ thing because they reduce code length without losing clarity. When you have multiword symbol names, they get ugly _really_ fast if you don't abbreviate. It's one of the things that tends to make Java code ugly; they frequently have overly long names because they don't abbreviate.

- Jonathan M Davis