loop

["Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@C.CS.CMU.EDU>]

I've been travelling and just saw your note.

I'll assume that by "the existing loop facility" you mean the one on the
MIT Lisp Machine and its immediate descendants.

In that case, my current view is 2 (this basic idea, but more lispy
syntax), but I'd listen to proposals for 3 (minor changes) or 1
(something different -- I didn't like LetS when I looked at it a couple
of years ago, but haven't had time to read Water's latest document).  I
don't advocate position 0 (add nothing like this), but am happy to live
with this until I see something I like.  This isn't one of those cases
where the hole is so awkward that ANY solution is preferable to doing
nothing.

-- Scott