Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!osu-cis!att-cb!clyde!tk@moss.ATT.COM
From: tk@moss.ATT.COM
Newsgroups: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: C-mode indentation weirdness
Message-ID: <24393@clyde.ATT.COM>
Date: 4 Apr 88 15:51:33 GMT
References: <1614@pinney.munsell.UUCP> <690007@hpsemc.HP.COM> <1630@pinney.munsell.UUCP>
Sender: news@clyde.ATT.COM
Reply-To: tk@moss.UUCP (Tom Kirk)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Whippany NJ
Lines: 11

In article <1630@pinney.munsell.UUCP> pz@pinney.UUCP (Paul Czarnecki) writes:
> . . .
>
>(And for those of you who scream, "You can't have function calls on
>the case line!", you are only half wrong.  Remember that MACROS can
>look like function calls.)

Well, of course you can you use macros to bastardize the language in almost
any way you please, including your example of using things that look like
function calls as labels in a switch statement. Why should a C-code indenter
be expected to deal with your mangled syntax, since it is not C?