Subject: Re: bug#21782: 25.0.50; New functions nfront/front

From: Artur Malabarba <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:45:57 +0000

On 30 Oct 2015 2:53 am, "Constantino Calancha" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Why i need to pollute my global space with all seq.el just to use this
> fundamental operation on a list?

I think, overall, sticking to seq-take has a smaller cost/benefit ratio
than adding nfront. I state my logic below.

These points are all a little subjective. So if you disagree and think that
the slider falls closer to the other side, we can wait to hear more
opinions (though at least Michael seems to agree).

1. While nfront is not identical to seq-take, it's similar enough that this
would just be replicating functionality, which is ultimately a maintenance
burden.
2. Seq is not a huge lib, so you're not polluting that much. Furthermore,
all its functions are prefixed by "seq-", so you're polluting even less.
Lastly, seq was added to core specifically with the purpose of being the
goto sequences lib (and it's been doing that fine), so it wouldn't make
sense to circumvent it now.
3. I'm of the opinion that we should be adding namespace prefixes as much
as possible. Unprefixed names pollute much more and are harder to find.

In any case, thanks for the suggestion.