Function constants

[Richard P. Gabriel <rpg@lucid.com>]

well, I think we're pretty much in synch here. The question of macros
being defined or available before the code that uses them is an
interesting one. It is easy to imagine a programming environment in
which recompilation of all required definitions is done whenever a
macro changes.

So, should we include structuring information? If so, should we only
worry about which definitions should appear before which others?  What
do we say about recursive loads and compiles? Presumably the
Lisp-symbol-redefinition covers some bad case; what about readtables
and packages? (I guess something is already said about packages.)

Should we worry about loading compiled files into images in which
compilation already happened, or should we state that we can only
guarantee semantics in the fresh Lisp case? 

Regardless of what we do, we need to state that what is actually
sensible in some particular program structure will depend on the
implementation. Possibly we should indicate some things that might
work(?).

What is the resolution of function constants? I prefer these solutions in
this order:

1. Allow them to be used everywhere

2. Allow them to be allowed nowhere, but allow implementations to
extend (that is, leave it undefined).

3. Allow some mixtures in some cases.

			-rpg-