mini-ballot

[David.Dill at CMU-10A (L170DD60)]

1. I am not convinced that the usefulness of SETF-like defun syntax
for putting the things where you want them, or for debugging, justifies
the extra hair and ugliness.  A case could be made that it's sociable
to name your functions if you want it to be easy to debug code that calls
them.  In common lisp, you can even have named lambda expressions
without doing a DEFUN.

2. Since the special declarations generated by DEFVAR are pervasive, it
is relatively easy to bind a special accidentally, thinking that it's a
local variable.  The best solution to this sort of problem, and a lot
of others, would be to distinguish syntactically special bindings and
references from lexical ones.  Otherwise, a special/lexical naming
convention seems like the best thing (e.g. if the variable starts with
an "S", it's special).