Re: What can LISPM community do about MAKE-LIST

[jonl at MIT-MC, kmp at MIT-MC]

Despite any previous mail, we sense a general feeling that
the optional second argument to MAKE-LIST should be the area
rather than the size.  Could this be considered the consensus
of the LISP-FORUM community?  More importantly, NIL really
can't accommodate the the current LISPM definition, since
there are a whole slew of generalized sequence functions with
the same format, and it would be a gross inconvenience to have
the semantics of MAKE-LIST differ from the others.  
   E.g MAKE-string, MAKE-vector, MAKE-bits, etc form
part of such a nice symmetry that it would be a shame to
break it for no good reason.