Issue: SETF-FUNCTION-VS-MACRO (version 3)

[Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>]

[X3J13 removed.]

I support many ideas of this proposal, but I have two gripes which make me
have to oppose it:
 * I can't deal with the idea of generalizing SYMBOL-FUNCTION. I would like
   to see FDEFINITION introduced and SYMBOL-FUNCTION left alone.
 * I'm also a little leary about TRACE being extended this way because
   (TRACE (a list)) might later want to be interpreted as options rather
   than as a function spec and I'd rather not have to risk heuristic resolution.
   I would rather someone right now introduce a generalized syntax for TRACE
   with syntactic space for trace options, such as 
     (TRACE (fn . options) (fn . options) (fn . options))
   and then allow the generalized (non-symbol) fn to only occur within that
   syntax so that no ambiguity results.