Issue: DESTRUCTURING-BIND (Version 1)

[Jon L White <jonl@lucid.com>]

Well, foo, I wish someone had thought of this sooner.  Clearly, lots
of implementations provide it just as proposed (but in implementation
dependent ways, in order to facilitate error checking).  I think this
is a tad too late for CL1989, don't you?  double foo.

I also agree with Larry that any motivational reasoning based on LOOP
is a red-herring.  DESTRUCTURING-BIND itself would not be so useful in
implementing LOOP as would some underlying functionality that an
implementation of  DESTRUCTURING-BIND might use.  GSB's portable LOOP
carries around it's own version of destruction (or, the seeds thereof?).


-- JonL --