Issue: COPY-SYMBOL-COPY-PLIST

[Barry Margolin <barmar@Think.COM>]

Issue:		COPY-SYMBOL-COPY-PLIST
References:	COPY-SYMBOL (p 169), COPY-LIST (p 268), COPY-TREE (p
		269).
Category:	CLARIFICATION
Edit history:	10-Jan-89, Version 1 by Margolin

Problem Description:

The description of COPY-SYMBOL, where the COPY-PROPS optional argument
is non-NIL, says that a copy of the property list is used as the new
symbol's property list.  However, there are several ways in which a list
may be copied, most notably COPY-LIST and COPY-TREE, and the description
doesn't say which mechanism should be used.

Proposal (COPY-SYMBOL-COPY-PLIST:COPY-LIST)

Clarify that when COPY-SYMBOL copies the property list of the symbol, it
is as if (COPY-LIST (SYMBOL-PLIST sym)) were used as the new symbol's
property list.

Rationale:

COPY-LIST is the simplest list-copying primitive.  The result of this
copy is that GET returns EQL results for the two symbols until one of
the property lists is altered, but altering either of the property lists
doesn't affect the other.  This is current practice in the
implementations I tested, and probably what most users assume.

Current Practice:

Symbolics Genera and Sun Common Lisp currently implement this.  I
suspect most others do, too.

Cost to Implementors:

Little or none.

Cost to Users:

None unless they've been assuming some other type of copy.

Benefits:

Less ambiguity.

Aesthetics:

Well, I like it.