Re: issue COMPILED-FUNCTION-REQUIREMENTS, version 4

[Dan L. Pierson <pierson@mist.encore.com>]

    	Actually, now I'm also a bit confused.  Since we passed the
    	FUNCTION-TYPE proposal, is the second argument to COMPILE
    	supposed to be a lambda expression or a function?  Should I
    	have said (compile nil (source-code f)) ?
        
        Not if you're interested in the value cell of f instead of the
        function cell.
    
    Huh?  Doesn't (source-code f) return the source lambda expression for
    the function in the value cell of F?  SOURCE-CODE is just a function, so
    how could it access the function cell?  By the way, I may be
    misremembering the name we gave to the function that returns the
    original lambda expression; please correct me if so.
    
Arg, I must be asleep today.  Of course it does.  However I believe
that COMPILE wants a function not a source lambda expression.