Re: Issue: TYPE-OF-UNDERCONSTRAINED (Version 3)

[masinter.pa@Xerox.COM]

On p. 317, CLtL gives an example

(defstruct (binop (:type list))
	(operator '? :type symbol)
	operand-1
	operand-2)

and says in the running text ...


"... and TYPE-OF will return LIST when given a BINOP structure."

I guess if the example survives in the standard it should be fixed.... I
don't see a compelling reason why

(TYPE-OF '(A B C)) should be LIST instead of CONS, do you?