Macros -> declarations

[Bernard S. Greenberg <BSG@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>]

    Date: Wed, 8 May 85 11:53 EDT
    From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK@SCRC-YUKON.ARPA>

    Instead of DECLARE forms being allowed to be macros, why not allow the
    forms INSIDE declare forms be macros?  Using macros rather than
    "declaration macros" lets you then use macrolet, and avoids the need for
    any new "DEFDECLARE" special forms to document or implement.

    This doesn't quite cover the bases, though, unless we also deal with
    expanding into multiple declarations [i.e. (REGISTER X) ->
    (SPECIAL X) (FIXNUM X)].
    I'll propose two ways to deal with that.

    1)  Allow (DECLARE (FOO X) ((SPECIAL X) (FIXNUM X))) to mean the
    same as (DECLARE (FOO X) (SPECIAL X) (FIXNUM X))

    2)  Allow (DECLARE (FOO X) (DECLARE (SPECIAL X) (FIXNUM X))).  I.e.
    Allow DECLARE as a declaration containing declarations.

3) Allow (DECLARE (PROGN .....))  [The onus of history.]

At any rate, RWK's whole proposal seems to cover all bases.