Incredible co-incidence about the format ((MACRO . f) ...)

[Jon L White <JONL at MIT-MC>]

One of my previous messages seemed to imply that ((MACRO . f) ...)
on the LISPM fulfills the intent of my second suggestion -- apparently
there is a completely unforseen consequence of the fact that
   (FSYMEVAL 'FOO) => (MACRO . <foofun>)
when FOO is defined as a macro, such that the interpreter "makes it work".
However, MACROEXPAND knows nothing about this format, which is probably
why the compiler can't handle it; also such action isn't documented
anywhere.

Thus I believe it to be merely an accidental co-incidence that the
interpreter does anything at all meaningful with this format.   My
"second suggestion" now is to institutionalize this "accident"; it
certainly would make it easier to experiment with a pseudo-functional
programming style, and it obviously hasn't been used for any other
meaning.