Painful retraction

[Robert.Frederking@cmu-cs-cad.arpa]

	I made the mental equivalent of a typo in my original question to
Guy Steele, thus inadvertantly slandering DEC.
	What I meant to inquire about was that the *access functions* give
fatal errors if handed nil, which is a more reasonable behavior (if still
personally annoying).  Thus, (ship-name nil) blows up, whereas I would
prefer it to just return nil.  I.e., it would be nice if nil were the "null
structure", even though structures aren't (in VaxLisp) implemented as lists.
	So, I'll make a corrected version of my original question: would it
be against the CommonLisp standard for an implementor to allow nils to pass
through the automatically-defined access functions, even if structures are
not implemented as lists?  (A much less exciting question, I'm afraid.)
	Sorry for the confusion.  (Blush.)

	Bob