[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: issue DEFINING-MACROS-NON-TOP-LEVEL, version 3
- To: David N Gray <Gray@dsg.csc.ti.com>
- Subject: Re: issue DEFINING-MACROS-NON-TOP-LEVEL, version 3
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Sandra J Loosemore)
- Date: Tue, 20 Sep 88 14:19:11 MDT
- Cc: email@example.com (Sandra J Loosemore), firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: David N Gray <Gray@DSG.csc.ti.com>, Mon, 19 Sep 88 11:49:10 CDT
Since there are a couple of other implementations that treat COMPILER-LET
like PROGN here, I'll go ahead and change the proposal.
I've also noticed another oversight here: the expansion of a macro call
that appears as a top-level form should also be a top-level form. Does
anybody wish to dispute that?