Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> schrieb am Mo., 6. Nov. 2017 um
15:41 Uhr:

> > >> We should perhaps put something about throwing error on '&option
> &rest'
> > >> into NEWS though.
> > >
> > > I don't understand.  In Common Lisp it is perfectly correct
> > > to use both &optional and &rest.
> >
> > What's rejected is (&optional &rest other-vars), whereas (&optional
> > var1 &rest other-vars) is okay. Does CL accept the first form (and if
> > yes, what does it mean)? I couldn't tell from the page you linked to.
>
> CL accepts a single variable after &rest. And there must be
> a variable after &optional.  (&optional foo &rest bar) is OK.
>
> (&optional &rest foo) is not OK.
> (&optional foo &rest bar toto titi) is not OK.
>

That should match the current behavior in Emacs Lisp now.