Re: PSL's FOR Macro

[David A. Moon <Moon@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA>]

    Date: 10 Apr 85 13:52 MST
    From: Stanley Shebs <shebs%utah-orion@utah-cs>
    Question:  would the existing LOOP with hacked syntax be acceptable
    as a standard?  Are there any clauses that are retained for historical
    reasons only, or are all of them frequently enough useful to be
    retained?

Perhaps you joined the mailing list after I mailed out the name of a file
containing the results of discussions about redesigning LOOP that I had with
several people three years ago (or was it four years?).  If you're interested
I can dig that up again; I think there was zero response last time.  In brief,
some clauses should be removed and the overall organization should be based
on better principles.