Michel Hermier

Out of curiosity, what is your use case? The real general case would be to use `sequence.iteratorValue(sequence.iterate(null))`. Unless I'm mistaken, there is no guarantee that it will output a predicable...

@PureFox48 These implementations are `O(N)`. `O(1)` can be achieved in most case with a `reverse().first()`, since most `reverse()` could be implemented lazily. It would also help to guarantee that we...

`first(unaryPredicate)` really sounds like `find(unaryPredicate)` returning a value instead of an iterator. So maybe it should be something like `findValue(unaryPredicate)` instead?

The real question is why do you need to handle only the first entry. I mean when you are dealing with a list of item, either: - one treat the...

For me, instead it should be name more something like "peekValue" (that throw) with a compagnon "peekValueOr" (that has a default value), since it removes the notion of position in...

It has an intrinsic order which is necessary for traversal, not a stable order in the sense that inserting objects in some order guarantee the *traversal* order in every `Sequence`...

It is true, the API is somehow broken/inconsistent in some aspects. It doesn't take into account some `Sequence`s behaviors like infinite size, ordering and probably some others I don't think...

I proposed `peekValue` because I thought it could returns an iterator. But I agree `peek` make sense. About `peekOr` I insist on it. We need to be able to distinguish...

`undefined` exist in the VM. It is not exposed to the public, and serve as a tombstone value for the map implementation. It is only a matter of political decision...

> Although I know that you have strong views and many ideas on how you'd like to see Wren develop, I didn't know that you had plans for an entirely...