RE: Predicate for true lists

[Drew Adams]

> > IOW, there's no reason we should not just talk about the cdr
> > of a list, with no special typography used for the word "cdr".
> 
> In the manual, yes.  In docstrings, on the other hand, I like that `cdr'
> quoting results in a link to that function's documentation.

OK, but only if the function is really what is meant.

If all that is meant is the cons place/position or the
return value from the function then I'd just say "the
car" or "the cdr" (without the quotes).  Same thing
with talking about conses (aka "cons cells") - "cons"
is a word, for Emacs users.

Anyway, as mentioned, what I said "probably does not
reflect an Emacs doc-string or manual convention".

It's just my opinion: we shouldn't shy away from using
(common, longstanding) Lispy language when talking about
the Lisp language.