RE: sequence manipulation functions

[Drew Adams]

> I think these should use a "seq-" prefix.  This will not only avoid
> naming conflicts, but also helps discover those functions, since you
> can type `(seq- TAB' to see all related functions.

No.  Emacs should follow Common Lisp in this regard.
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/clm/node141.html#SECTION001800000000000000000

And it should follow it not only in terms of names but also in terms
of behavior, as much as is practical.  E.g., `some-p' should be `some',
and it should have the Common Lisp `some' behavior.

This might already be more or less the case for `cl-some' etc., in
which case there is no need (and it would be a nuisance) to add a
separate `some-p' etc. with a different behavior.