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

[Leo Liu]

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cl-concatenate in the first place are no longer applicable.