Re: master e4df903f6b5 2/2: ; Fix last change

> I agree.  I think we should eliminate all binding of symbol function
> definitions.  The way to start would be to make `letf` give a warning
> for attempts to bind symbol function definitions.

I don't think that would be very helpful: most uses of `cl-letf` are
definitely no accidents: yes, most (all?) of them are hacks, but they're
hacks where the alternatives are arguably worse.

So, AFAIC, `cl-letf` is in the same camp as `advice-add`.

OTOH, we could add an `advice-let` to replace those `cl-letf` uses with
something slightly better behaved.  I've considered it several times in
the past, but I'm still not sure it's worth the trouble.


=== Stefan