New special form suggestion: LET-CONSTANT

[SOLEY@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU]

    Date: Monday, 3 August 1987  12:07-EDT
    From: Barry Margolin <barmar at Think.COM>

    Today I noticed myself creating DEFCONSTANTS for symbolic constants that
    would only be used by the one function I was writing.

A declaration would be much cleaner; you could still write let-constant
(or constantlet) in terms of it, as well as defconstant for that matter
[(proclaim '(constant ...))].

    It seems like a LET-CONSTANT special form, or an &CONSTANT lambda-list
    keyword, would be the right thing for this.  LET-CONSTANT would be to
    DEFPARAMETER what FLET is to DEFUN, and &CONSTANT would be analogous to
    &AUX.

Yeah, and how about an &LOGOUT lambda-list keyword, to log out the current
process?  Really, although I understand the trivial difference in scope
between LET and &AUX, do we need to continue adding random lambda-list
keywords, which (worse yet) aren't keywords at all?

	-- Richard