Re: Defining the forms to which the # constructs expand

[MOON at SCRC-TENEX]

    Date: 16-Nov-82 16:25:04 PST (Tuesday)
    From: Masinter at PARC-MAXC

    You may not think this is an important kind of thing to do, but it seems that
    defining COMMON-LISP in a way which precludes building such tools is unnecessary
    and a mistake.

I could say exactly the same thing, word for word, about #,.  Of course the
presence of #, in the language hardly precludes building tools that can't work
with it, it only means that those tools cannot work with that construct, and a
user must choose one or the other.  This is not ideal, but I thought we went
through this discussion last year, and concluded that there was no way to
satisfy all requirements at the same time.  Of course, as Steele points out in
his message, you only have to crank up your cleverness a little and use a
smarter reader, and you can still write the same tools.