RE: RFC: String interpolation

[Drew Adams]

>   > If Emacs extends `format', I'd vote for it to follow Common Lisp.
> 
> That could have many meanings.  I hope you don't mean switching from %
> to ~ to introduce special constructs.  That would be extremely painful
> and I am firmly against it.
> 
> If what you mean is not an incompatible change in Emacs, then I have
> no opinion about it a priori.

1. I was speaking only generally, there.

2. If the same name (`format') is kept, then yes, it would need to
   be a compatible change.  If another name (e.g. `cl-format') were
   used then it can (and if prefix `cl-' is used then it should)
   use % etc.  It would be possible to either or both.

I find Common Lisp `format' to be good.  In general, the more Emacs
Lisp `format' were to move toward it, the better, I think.