[not about] Constant Functions

[Jon L White <edsel!jonl@labrea.stanford.edu>]

re:    Date: Sat, 7 May 88 03:13:06 PDT
       From: Jon L White <edsel!jonl@labrea.stanford.edu>
       CLtL, p162 speaks of the VALUES declaration; it says nothing at all
       like  that.
    That's a type-specifier, not a declaration.

Extended the way implied by barmar, it's also a declaration; see CLtL p158. 

Just for the record, when one can do (DECLARE (<foo> X Y Z)), one usually 
speaks of this as the <foo> declaration, even when <foo> is basically a 
type-specifier.  The  rationale is apparently that this form is an 
abbreviation for (DECLARE (TYPE <foo> X Y Z)).

re:    One could introduce a different word for this type of declaration,
    instead of using DECLARE, but I think that would be more confusing than
    enlightening.

DECLARE is good enough.  I'm happy to see that Symbolics didn't perpetrate
the lossage implied in recent messages that such a declare would be
equivalent to a (non-lexical) PROCLAIM.


-- JonL --