Re: COMPILER-LET

[Dan L. Pierson <pierson%mist@multimax.ARPA>]

    In my opinion, the real problem is that interpreted-only
    implementations are not required to make a semantic-prepass. This
    means that macro expansion and COMPILER-LET handling may happen all at
    once or at any known time, so it must risk interfering with runtime
    variable bindings. If interpreters were required to do the pre-pass
    (effectively, a mini-compile just doing macro expansion, etc), not
    only would COMPILER-LET seem ok, but other problem spots in the
    language (like EVAL-WHEN) would be easier to tackle as well.
    
This may be too advanced for this late date, but...    

Would this (and other) problems be reduced if we defined a
code-walking primitive and required it in the language?  Would this
reduce Sandra's objection to forcing all interpreters to do a pre-pass?