bug#42324: 26.3; Doc string of `seq-concatenate'

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> > In Emacs 26.3, this is the definition of `seq-concatenate':
> >
> > (cl-defgeneric seq-concatenate (type &rest sequences)
> >   "Concatenate SEQUENCES into a single sequence of type TYPE.
> > TYPE must be one of following symbols: vector, string or list.
> >
> > \n(fn TYPE SEQUENCE...)"
> >   (apply #'cl-concatenate
> >          type
> >          (seq-map #'seq-into-sequence sequences)))
> 
> If the bug report is about the doc string, please don't show the
> implementation as your evidence.  The issue is (or should be) with the
> text of the doc string.

You took that out of context.  The context was the
(apparent) change since 26.3, when the bug was reported.
And the bug report is (only) about the doc, including
differences `seq-concatenate' vs `cl-concatenate'.

IF those are now the same thing, and that's said
in the doc (which it apparently is), then #2 of this
bug report disappears.

And #1 is the same as bug #42323.  See also #3.

> > I'd say, overall, that I don't understand the behavior
> > by reading the doc string.
> 
> Which part(s) of the doc string's text are unclear?  The text is short
> and IMO very clear, so I'm puzzled by this bug report to begin with.
> 
> In general, it sounds like what you are after is to understand the
> implementation, and that can only be done by reading the code.  In
> that case, I see no bug to report here.

All of #1, #2, and #3 are only about the doc string.

In any case, the real difficulty is #1, which is bug
#42323.  If that gets fixed properly, AND if
`seq-concatenate' is now exactly the same as
`cl-concatenate' and that's stated in the doc, then
things should be clear.

What's discussed in this thread is, however, relevant
to bug #42323, I think.  Including if the behavior
can change depending on SEQUENCES, as seems to be
the case from looking at the code and `cl-defgeneric'.

The bug report is not about the implementation at
all.  It's about the doc specifying the behavior.