2nd generation LOOP macro

[Scott E. Fahlman <Fahlman at Cmu-20c>]

Moon's description of LOOP is reasonably clear.  To me, LOOP looks like
a lot of hairy syntax for no reason.  The equivalent DO constructs look
simpler and clearer to me in almost all cases, but then I'm a
conservative -- I don't like CLISP or CGOL either.  People keep coming
up with these things, so there must be a need felt in some quarters to
which I am insensitive.  I would have said that this sort of thing is a
training/transition aid for those not comfortable with Lisp, but
considering the source of this proposal that can't be the true story.

Is there any reason why LOOP should not be a yellow-pages package for
those who like this sort of syntax?

-- Scott