belated editorial comment

[Sonya E. Keene <skeene@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>]

    Date: Wed, 27 Apr 88 10:59 PDT
    From: Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM

    I believe that this one of jonl's belated messages should be dealt with
    by putting a comment at the front of this section saying this is just a
    summary of something the cleanup committee is already dealing with.
    Either that or it should be removed entirely.

Until Common Lisp itself has a spec in which all of the Cleanup issues
are documented, I think it best to keep this section in the CLOS spec.

    Date: Tue, 26 Apr 88 20:56 PDT
    From: Jon L White <edsel!jonl@labrea.Stanford.EDU>
    To: common-lisp-object-system@sail.stanford.edu
    Subject: "Written Responses" to CLOS 88-002: SETF Functions


	    "Introduction to Setf Functions" Belongs in CLtL, not CLOS

    The title of this response says it all.  How many times have we heard CLOS 
    subcommittee members invoke a shield against criticism by saying "CLOS can't
    hope to fix Common Lisp's problems.".  But the Setf Functions section does 
    exactly that!  

    More to the point, there is no need, now, to have this in the CLOS spec, 
    since it has already been tentatively approved by the Cleanup committee.  

    At worst, the CLOS spec may want to contain this exposition as a kind of 
    extended footnote, so that newer readers not familiar with the other X3J13 
    work will know what is going on.

I believe the CLOS spec will have many readers who are not familiar with
the other X3J13 work that is going on.  


    -- JonL --
    -------