Re: seq-some-p and nil

[David Kastrup]

Nicolas Petton <address@hidden> writes:

> Simen Heggestøyl <address@hidden> writes:
>
> Hi Simen,
>
>> Ah, sorry, I should have been clearer. What I meant was that it could
>> guarantee to return the *first* non-nil value that resulted from
>> applying the predicate, like in CL.
>>
>> So for instance, (seq-some #'1+ '(1 3 5)) could guarantee to return 2,
>> not 4 or 6.
>
> You lost me.  Isn't that exactly what `seq-some' does?
>
>     (seq-some #'1+ '(1 3 5)) ;; => 2
>
> Or did you mean that the documentation of `seq-some' should state that
> `seq-some' returns the first non-nil value?

Yes, I think that's what he wants in order to have some reassurance
against the "I've altered the semantics.  Pray I don't alter them any
further." phenomenon.

-- 
David Kastrup