There are relatively few sequence functions from CL in the standard library. The majority of them
reside in `cl-lib`, which IMO can’t be counted as part of the standard library. After all its own description
is:

;; These are extensions to Emacs Lisp that provide a degree of
;; Common Lisp compatibility, beyond what is already built-in
;; in Emacs Lisp.


While I’d prefer it we adopted the names from Scheme and Clojure (e.g. filter vs remove-if-not), 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).

—
Cheers, 
Bozhidar

On November 14, 2014 at 7:16:49 AM, Leo Liu (sdl.web@gmail.com) wrote:

On 2014-11-13 13:21 +0800, Drew Adams wrote:  
> It should be based on the existing sequence functions in Common Lisp,  
> as stated earlier. Such things were worked out for Lisp eons ago.  
> There is really no reason to do something very different, other  
> things being equal.  

I think most people will like this option. So I was hypothesising what  
was being done i.e. `If we were to model another set of list/seq  
routines after other......' since we already have one after CL.  

Leo