declaration pervasiveness.

["Scott E. Fahlman" <Fahlman@CMU-CS-C.ARPA>]

    If you follow the language defined in the book, you will find that your
    function is illegal.  Declarations are not permitted after FLET, LABELS,
    or MACROLET.  A lot of the language in the book seems to assume that
    these forms don't exist.

    Once you admit their existance, it is clear (to me at least) that
    several things follow.  First, FTYPE and [NOT]INLINE declarations should
    be able to follow them and second, that these declarations should not be
    pervasive.

This seems to me like the only sensible interpretation, even if the
language in the book is contradictory.  What we have here is a very
strong analogy with variable-binding forms, and we need similar
machinery for declaring things about a particular lexical binding of a
function name.  Obviously the language about declarations in the book
was written before we had really faced up to the existence of lexically
scoped function definitions.

I'm not so sure about MACROLET, however.  It's not clear that FTYPE and
INLINE make any sense here.

-- Scott