On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 11:59 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> There is no "Lisp program", only "Lisp data".  A program is Lisp data
> that makes sense as a program.

Yes, and your last sentence describes exactly what I like to
call a "Lisp program". Let's just agree to give it that name,
OK. So that it "exists" (in fact a large part of Emacs is made
up of the stuff).

> The argument is not about the need for a fix, it's about where the fix
> should be.  Ideally, the byte-compiler should have got its act
> together and not attempted to produce code out of those files.
> Failing that, we need to help the byte compiler DTRT.

It's been shown many times the problem is not exclusive to the
byte-compiler. It's merely an example of a tool that only makes
exclusive sense for "Lisp programs", or "data that makes sense
as a program" as you put it.

> >  This was also already said several times.
> > By you, exclusively, right?  Or by someone else I missed?
> Also by Andreas and by Richard.
Not true of Richard: he said "All code is data, but only some
data is code". That is exactly the distinction I am making.

João