Re: Would seq-range and seq-mapcat be useful?

[Mark Oteiza]

Nicolas Petton <address@hidden> writes:
> Oleh Krehel <address@hidden> writes:
>> I like `seq-group-by`.
>>
>> I'm not sure about `seq-mapcat`, since there is `cl-mapcan` (although
>> it's destructive), I guess `seq-mapcat` would be fine.
>>
>> And I would prefer the name `seq-partition` instead of `seq-slice`,
>> since `partition' is a Clojure name with same effect, and slice means
>> something different in Python.
>
> Yes, I felt the same.

Makes sense. Array slicing seems to be just taking a subsequence in a
lot of languages.  Perhaps aliasing seq-slice to seq-subseq would be
good to do.