RE: [Emacs-diffs] trunk r117002: Correctly treat progn contents as toplevel forms when byte compiling

[Drew Adams]

> That said, the CL way is much better. It's conceptually simpler to say
> that defmacro at toplevel is well-defined (progn contents being
> considered "toplevel") and everything else is undefined than to try to
> support this defmacro stuff in *all* contexts and run into the exciting
> corner inherent in your approach...

Are you saying that in CL if defmacro is used elsewhere than at top level
it is not well-defined?  That doesn't sound right to me.

(Apologies if I misunderstand.  If so, or if irrelevant, please ignore.)