Any reasons against having `fboundp-and-funcall' (equivalent to `bound-and-true-p')?

[Jens Schmidt]

I was delighted when I recently came across `bound-and-true-p' in 
standard Emacs.  But what about `fboundp-and-funcall'?  Like this:

(defmacro fboundp-and-funcall (function &rest arguments)
  `(let ((function ,function))
     (and (fboundp function)
          (funcall function ,@arguments))))

;; arguments not eval'ed in case of failure
(fboundp-and-funcall #'foo (setq baz 'bar))
nil
(boundp 'baz)
nil

(fboundp-and-funcall #'identity 'foo)
foo

WDYT?