allSatisfy isn't a brilliant name because it doesn't take a closure, but we don't have a Collection function named
allEqual (it would probably be worth adding, though).
I don't mind if they are or not, as long as they are relatively well-contained. As you note, the standard library is deliberately small, and this proposal has a massive surface area as-is. I don't think that's good for progressive disclosure.
Also, I would just point out that I don't mean "esoteric" in any disparaging sense. I mean it in the sense of "intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest".
What do you mean by this? The vector comparison does produce an aggregate - a
Mask, and the function is called with/on the mask to collapse it to scalar, which is the thing you actually test in an
I would also note that
Any is also the name of a rather important type in Swift. We also have the
sequence(...) functions, but those are actually related to one another, while
any(...) are not.
If this spelling as a free function is so incredibly important, I think that counts in favour of it being part of some separate module - again, in the interest of progressive disclosure.