Robert Dodier wrote:
> On 4/12/08, Richard Fateman <fateman at cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure how to make everyone (else) happy, but I would like memq
>> defined as a macro, and its use encouraged.
>
> OK. I think I've had enough of MEMQ for a lifetime or two.
>
> Andreas, in the interest of simply reducing strife,
> please don't change any more MEMQ's.
> If someone wants to revert some MEMBER to MEMQ,
> that's OK by me.
I'd much rather see them all converted to member than leaving the code
in this half-finished state.
Ray