bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*

[Michael Heerdegen]

Mark Oteiza <mvoteiza@udel.edu> writes:

> Ok, great.  All tests passed, so I installed it.  Closing!

Thanks, good work.

One more small thing I thought about after Stefan's question: We have
this sentence in the doc of `if-let*':

| An element can additionally be of the form (VALUEFORM), which is
| evaluated and checked for nil.

Would it ease understanding if we would add something like "i.e. you can
omit the SYMBOL if you are only interested in the test result".

Oh, and I find we have some inconsistency: I haven't looked how the
behavior was before, but I see that `if-let*' (and thus `when-let*')
treats an empty VARLIST as failure (the ELSEs are executed).  Contrary
to `and-let*', which treats it as success.  IMO, `and-let*' does what is
expected, and we should change `if-let*' to behave accordingly (and as
the documentation suggests).

WDYT?


Thanks,

Michael.