our votes in the Memorial Day Ballot

[Dir LCSR Comp Facility <HEDRICK@RUTGERS.ARPA>]

1. Yes, delete PARSE-NUMBER.  We like the idea of a simpler PARSE-INTEGER.
2. Yes, LOOP should create BLOCK NIL
3. Yes, we favor GET-INTERNAL-TIME and GET-REAL-TIME, however:
   - we would like better names, e.g. GET-RUN-TIME and GET-CLOCK-TIME
   - we would like a function or read-only variable that gives the number
	of ticks per second
4. Yes, we agree that macros should not expand to undocumented special forms.
5. We abstain on :ALLOW-OTHER-KEYS
6. No, we do not want to complicate MULTIPLE-VALUES.  (Actually, we would
	strongly favor simplifying it by removal.)
7. Yes, we agree to eliminate CATCH-ALL and UNWIND-ALL.  If Moon can't
	think of any use for them, we are sure we won't be able to.
8. Yes, we agree to adding destructuring to DEFMACRO.  We are persuaded
	that documentation and other program-understanding functions could
	be helped if they can easily see what is going on in the macro.
9. Yes, restrict DECLARE and add PROCLAIM.  (Alternatively, we would be
	happy to forget PROCLAIM.  Make DECLARE typed at top level act
	like PROCLAIM.)
10. Yes, restrict SIMPLE-VECTOR.
11. Yes, use (FILL-POINTER) and (SETF (FILL-POINTER...
12. No, we oppose named vectors.  They appear to be a half-baked compromise
	that we think you will regret.  I am sympathetic with the idea of
	defining how DEFSTRUCT is to be implemented.  We think that you
	should either make these a full type, or a documented programming
	convention.  Named vectors seem to be half-way in between and to
	share the disadvantages of both.
13. Yes, put in *READ-BASE*
14. No, we oppose SUB-every read function.  There has to be a better way.
	And not keywords....  If the combined wisdom of this list can't
	come up with a better way, then maybe a month from now...
15. Yes, rename *PRINfoo*
16. Yes, do what Guy wants with floating point formats.  (I give him my
	proxy to make minor adjustments latter if he has better ideas.)
17. Yes, eliminate MAXPREFIX and MAXSUFFIX.
18. We favor Scott's ideas on package names.
19. Yes, ~:A and ~:S should affect only top-level NIL's.
20. We would accept makig APROPOS and PPRINT return NIL, but would prefer
	having them return no values.
21. Yes, make features keywords.
-------