Stefan Monnier writes: > And using seq-some doesn't have the weird nil corner case. Just like CL's `find-if' and Scheme's `find', if one is looking for nil, and if `seq-find' is not supposed to return a boolean, then it's fine with me. You'd always have `seq-some' if it's an issue in a specific scenario anyway. > And defining seq-find as I did means it's always less efficient. It's ok, I think, for `seq-find' to reuse `seq-some'. You can't both want to remove code duplication and be as efficient as the code you are reusing. Nico