[no subject]

[KMP,RWK at MIT-MC]

UNCC:Greenberg@MIT-MULTICS

Suppose the syntax for cond were as follows:

(COND [<optional-(atomic)-label>]
      (<pred> <form1> <form2> ...)
      ...)

And inside a named-cond, the label would be initially bound to NIL and
each time a <pred> were EVAL'd, the label would get the value. (Naturally
the compiler could optimize this out where possible).  This allows
the flexibility provided by GLS's extension, with a cleaner, more
Lisp-like syntax. 

RWK is implementing a 'CCOND' macro in MacLISP that will describe the
exact specifications of this.

Comments?