named-lambda, etc

[Bill Rozas <JINX%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>]

    Date: Friday, 28 February 1986  14:56-EST
    From: Jonathan A Rees <JAR at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
    To:   JMiller at OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
    cc:   RRRS-AUTHORS at MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
    Re:   named-lambda, etc

    Why not NAMED-CONS, NAMED-VECTOR, NAMED-+, NAMED-READ-CHAR,
    NAMED-CALL-WITH-CURRENT-CONTINUATION, NAMED-WITH-INPUT-FILE, etc.?

Come on, now.  These objects have no good reason to have names
for themselves since they could use them in no way that I can see.
The case is obviously different for procedures.