SETF clarification

[Robert W. Kerns <RWK at MIT-MC>]

cc: KMP at MIT-MC, BUG-LISP at MIT-MC, BUG-LISPM at MIT-MC

As the leading advocate of returning the value like SETQ, I have written much
code assuming that it returns the value like SETQ.  I don't know exactly how
much of it actually DOES use it, I don't use it any more than I use the return
value from SETQ.  But I'd rather be able to write (PRINT (SETF foo bar))
than (LET ((BAR bar)) (SETF foo BAR) (PRINT BAR)), just like I'd rather do the
same with SETQ.  I believe it to be more readable; brevity can HELP
readability!