Re: **DRAFT** Issue COMPILER-VERBOSITY, version 5

[masinter.pa@Xerox.COM]

The benefits seem pretty weak given the cost. Why would I want a portable
way to control how much information is printed by COMPILE-FILE?

I can see wanting to have a portable way to compile a file, so I can
distribute a standard procedure for compiling my system, but most of the
print/informational stuff varies so widely, is of different format, and is
generally of use only while debugging code in a single system. 

The Medley version of COMPILE-FILE, for example, has several other
control-parameters that one might also want "portable" control over, except
that those aren't really portable: for example, you can ask it for an
assembly listing of everything it compiles; you can give it a pathname for
a new file for "errors" and have it automatically rebind *standard-error*
to that file, etc.

(compile-file input-file &key :output-file :lap-file :error-file
:errors-to-terminal :file-manager-format :process-entire-file :load)

I don't see any more need for making these "portable" options than I do
:verbose and :print.)