From xemacs-m  Wed Dec 25 22:10:53 1996
Received: from atreides.mindspring.com (qmailr@atreides.mindspring.com [204.180.142.236])
          by xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id WAA26197 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 25 Dec 1996 22:10:53 -0600 (CST)
Received: (qmail 2632 invoked by uid 52477); 26 Dec 1996 04:10:57 -0000
Sender: sj@atreides.mindspring.com
To: XEmacs beta <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>
Subject: Re: Planned interface tweaks for beta6/beta33
References: <m2loaoilwv.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> <yvian2v3n1u4.fsf@atreides.mindspring.com> <m2rakf7jvr.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 1.1.1.2)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: Sudish Joseph <sudish@mindspring.com>
Date: 25 Dec 1996 23:10:57 -0500
In-Reply-To: Steven L Baur's message of 24 Dec 1996 12:44:08 -0800
Message-ID: <yviaiv5qlzce.fsf@atreides.mindspring.com>
Lines: 14
X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.76/XEmacs 20.0

Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com> writes:
Sudish> Another problem with with-output-to-temp-buffer is that it
Sudish> gets special treatment from the byte-compiler.  Or, I think it
Sudish> does, I don't understand the bytecomp...but a grep in
Sudish> lisp/bytecomp is quite interesting.

> It must be treated as a special form, but that appears to be all.

Try advicing it, you'll get bogus errors from the byte-compiler on
certain _let_ bindings.  Very annoying, coz I blindly adviced it, and
then had to rack my brains a month later when the byte compiler
started choking on me. :-)

-Sudish

