function specs

[Daniel L. Weinreb <dlw at SCRC-TENEX at MIT-MC>]

    Maybe all we disagree about is whether to call the location expression a
    name and whether to make up a whole new syntax for it, rather than using
    the SETF syntax.

That is exactly right.  A "function spec" is a Lisp object that
designates a cell that might hold a function object.  You suggest using
a retriever-form, instead of using the new syntax that we use.  Our new
syntax is no worse than the new syntax for Lisp data types provided by
Common Lisp; it's just another one of those kinds of thing.

The implication of your proposal is that we'd have to add a new function
to do the retrieval for any kind of funcion spec we put in.  For
example, there would have to be a function that took a function and a
number, and returned the Nth internal function of that function, so that
you could do (:INTERNAL FOO 2) (it could take a name, too, but that's
orthagonal).  I guess our feeling was that it was better to avoid
introducing a new function for each kind of function spec, and it was
better to just create a new object capable of representing general
function locations and have a set of functions (FDEFINITION and friends)
that interpret them.  But your suggestion has merit too.  I don't feel
strongly one way or the other right now; I'd like to hear other input
from people.