Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes:

Hi Michael,

> [...]
> +(cl-defmethod seq-mapn (function (stream stream) &rest streams)
> +  "Map FUNCTION over the STREAMS.

I would add to the docstring that all elements of `streams' should be
streams, otherwise it will default to the generic implementation.

> +
> +Example: this prints the first ten Fibonacci numbers:
> +
> +  (letrec ((fibs (stream-cons
> +                  1
> +                  (stream-cons
> +                   1
> +                   (seq-mapn #'+ fibs (stream-rest fibs))))))
> +    (seq-do #'print (seq-take fibs 10)))
> +
> +\(fn FUNCTION STREAMS...)"
> +  (if (not (cl-every #'streamp streams))
               ^^^^^^^^
               Since this is for stream.el, why not use `seq-every-p'?
> +      (cl-call-next-method)
> +    (cl-callf2 cons stream streams)
> +    (stream-make
> +     (unless (cl-some #'seq-empty-p streams)
                 ^^^^^^^
                 Same question :-)
> [...]


> (1) Is it ok to implement it with `cl-call-next-method' this way?

I guess it is.  Have you tried running `seq-mapn' with a mix of streams
and lists?

Cheers,
Nico