Re: issue COMPILED-FUNCTION-REQUIREMENTS, version 4

[sandra%defun@cs.utah.edu (Sandra J Loosemore)]

> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 89 14:18:10 EST
> From: Dan L. Pierson <pierson@mist.encore.com>
> 
> What I (and believe Kent) want is a guarantee that it won't signal an
> error; if nothing else works COMPILE will simply apply #'IDENTITY to
> the symbol's function.

If this is the position people really want to adopt, I think we ought
to flush the COMPILED-FUNCTION type.  I can't imagine it would be
very useful in declarations if we always allow COMPILE to be a no-op
and never require it to return a COMPILED-FUNCTION.

I was going to restore the FLUSH proposal to this issue anyway, since
some people have now expressed an interest in seeing it back.

I still think that the minimum requirements for compilation specified in
the proposal should apply to COMPILE-FILE, regardless of what happens
to COMPILE and COMPILED-FUNCTION.

-Sandra
-------