Full reply

[Drew McDermott <Mcdermott@YALE.ARPA>]

(Previous one was truncated)

    1. Single quote read syntax: ...

This really seems pointless.  Is there actually some circumstance
in which one would want to redefine QUOTE?  If there were, what harm
could result from 'FOO being read as (QUOTE FOO)?  Since I can't visualize
the one, I have no intuitions about the other.

    2. The value of T ...

I confess that I have written code that depends upon T => T.
I am very sorry.  However, all other things being equal, please don't
break my code.

    3. Semantics of LET....

I redefine LET anyway, so I don't really care.  However, I tend to
think that destructuring and multiple-value binding should be more
flagrantly flagged than via multiple levels of paren nesting.  Hence
I would vote for letting it be like LABELS.
-------