RE: [PATCH] sequence manipulation functions

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

> > I’m fine with leaning more in the CL direction as long as this
> > is done by promoting some cl-lib functions to the standard
> > Emacs library. People shouldn’t have to require the entire
> > `cl-lib` just for the same of a handful of sequence functions.
> >
> > I don’t think it’s normal that pretty much every Emacs package
> > depends on their `cl-lib` or the third party lib `dash.el`.
> > Emacs hackers obviously feel that the standard library is
> > lacking and it should be improved somehow (preferably now
> > instead of next decade).
> 
> I agree. Promoting some sequence-related cl-lib functions would
> also be perfectly fine with me. I have no problem with adopting
> CL names, but I do feel that the current standard library is
> lacking.

I am generally in favor of moving Emacs Lisp closer to Common
Lisp.  So I too think that this would be a good change.

That said, I don't mind having to use `require' or having such
things be autoloaded.  Perhaps further factoring of the CL Elisp
files would mean that less code would need to be loaded to use
such functions (dunno).  As BB said:

> > People shouldn’t have to require the entire `cl-lib` just
> > for the same of a handful of sequence functions.

I think that one of the reasons that I wouldn't have suggested
including such functions in Emacs Lisp in the past was that it
did not really support lexical binding.  And dynamic binding
makes extensive use of higher-order functions problematic.
But we have lexical binding now (thanks mainly to Stefan), so
that particular caveat is no longer applicable.