Re: cl-functions do not honor common-lisp-indent-function

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>]

Helmut Eller writes:
 > On Wed, Dec 26 2012, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
 > 
 > > Helmut Eller writes:
 > >
 > >  > Those cl-* symbols have no (predefined) meaning for Common Lisp so
 > >  > shouldn't be in cl-indent.el; for the same reason there shouldn't be
 > >  > rules for save-excursion or condition-case.
 > >
 > > That is irrelevant.
 > 
 > Why?  Why should common-lisp-indent-function, by default, implement
 > something other than the Common Lisp conventions?

It shouldn't.  And certainly not by default (perhaps I should have
used the word "optional" instead of "modal").  But you've got the
wrong question.  The right one is the inverse:

    Why should anything other than `common-lisp-indent-function'
    implement the Common Lisp conventions?

 > > If the user thinks of these symbols as equivalent
 > > to "real" Common Lisp standard symbols, then the user has every right
 > > to ask Emacs to treat them as Common Lisp symbols.
 > 
 > An Emacs Lisp user or for that matter a Scheme user has not "every
 > right" to dictate the indentation rules for Common Lisp users.

Of course users of other Lisp dialects should not dictate to Common
Lisp users.  But I was talking about *Emacs* users.  I don't have any
trouble imagining that some Emacs users who program in both Common
Lisp and cl.el would like to see cl-* expressions follow the
corresponding Common Lisp conventions.  After all, the OP is evidently
an example.

Steve