Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!csn!magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!crdgw1!camelback!volpe
From: volpe@camelback.crd.ge.com (Christopher R Volpe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: cond. op. on ='s LHS
Message-ID: <16782@crdgw1.crd.ge.com>
Date: 14 Feb 91 20:30:12 GMT
References: <4155@cernvax.cern.ch> <11073@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> <15184@smoke.brl.mil> <16754@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> <11129@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: news@crdgw1.crd.ge.com
Reply-To: volpe@camelback.crd.ge.com (Christopher R Volpe)
Lines: 28

In article <11129@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, johnm@cory.Berkeley.EDU (John
D. Mitchell) writes:
|>In article <16754@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> volpe@camelback.crd.ge.com
(Christopher R Volpe) writes:
|>[....]
|>>Yes, it's ugly, but it's conceivable that someone might have a good
|>>reason for defining a macro to do this, so that the macro may be used
|>>in an expression context.              
|>
|>Aahhh!  But context *is* everything.

Huh??? So, like, what's your point?

|>
|>One reason to use macros is to hide this sort of cryptic code behind
|>a nice facade.  Oh well... if only C had...  :-)

Isn't that what I suggested? Again, I'm unclear as to what you're trying
to say. Are you agreeing? Disagreeing? And what is it that you wish C had?

|>
|>----	John D. Mitchell
|>	johnm@cory.Berkeley.EDU
             
==================
Chris Volpe
G.E. Corporate R&D
volpecr@crd.ge.com