bug#45610: 27.1; Symbol’s function definition is void: seq-concatenate

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From:  Leo Liu <sdl.web@gmail.com>
> Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>,  45610@debbugs.gnu.org,  
> monnier@iro.umontreal.ca
> Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2021 13:39:03 +0800
> 
> On 2021-01-03 17:46 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > In your opinion, is this better than my suggestion?
> 
> I didn't comment much on this point last night.
> 
> Adding (require 'seq) to cl-concatenate is probably the least favourable
> because it also defeats the purpose of the `inline' cl-proclaim.
> 
> Adding autoload cookie for seq-concatenate is simple though not the
> cleanest, IOW, we have the workings of cl-concatenate in some situations
> depend on the autoload cookie. But this is not uncommon practice.
> 
> Given the dilemma we are in I wonder if the considerations for `inline'
> cl-concatenate in the first place are no longer applicable.

Thanks.

Stefan, any comments?  My personal tendency is to add the autoload
cookie, with a comment saying that cl-concatenate needs that.  At
least on the emacs-27 branch.  Any problems or issues with that?  What
do people think about removing cl-concatenate from the inline
declaration (on master)?