[Dave.Touretzky@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU: pluralization: two proposals]

[Guy Steele <gls@Think.COM>]

   Date: Mon, 6 Mar 89 20:14 EST
   From: David A. Moon <Moon@stony-brook.scrc.symbolics.com>

   I see no reason why this can't be handled by programming in Lisp
   rather than adding new syntax to FORMAT.

   Guy: I'm still pissed at you, even after more than ten years, for
   adding programming language features to FORMAT after we had all
   agreed not to do that.  OK, I admit I'm still speaking to you, and
   I admit that I use the features myself.  But I still think they
   are wrong.


Actually, on Tuesdays and Fridays I am pissed at myself for the same
reason.  But I use them, too.  More to the point, I still have not
seen an alternative that is more convenient.  But I would be happy to
see a cleanup proposal to nuke lots of formatting widgies.

FORMAT and LOOP are both like Lay's Potato Chips: betcha can't eat just one!

To Dick Waters: actually, in the pretty-printer proposal, perhaps
FORMAT should not be the *only* interface to the pretty-printer?
Maybe there should be functions one can call as well?


--Guy