bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 29.04.2020 04:38, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 4/28/20 5:55 PM, Drew Adams wrote:
> > You're_not_  using the language that's used for Common Lisp.
> In what sense does the language differ? Here's a quote from CLtL2 (page 115):
>
> "it is an error to destructively modify any object that appears as a constant
> in executable code, whether within a 'quote' special form or as
> a self-evaluating form."

As Drew pointed out (and if I understood this correctly), the above 
specification leads to implementations that do raise an error when 
someone tried to modify such a value.