Re: compiler-let

[Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@QUABBIN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>]

To: shebs@utah-orion.UUCP

    Date: Mon, 7 Jul 86 13:45:37 MDT
    From: shebs%utah-orion@utah-cs.arpa (Stanley Shebs)

    For PCLS we took advantage of subsetness and totally ignored COMPILER-LET,
    since nobody could figure out what it was really for or how a user could
    use it in correct code.

That's a very good way to make design decisions.

It's certainly true that CLtL does not explain compiler-let well enough.
A single example would probably help a great deal.

For purposes of future manual revisions: what other features did you
totally ignore for the same reasons?