Subject: [bug#63135] [PATCH 0/3] MATCH-RECROD improvements

From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 May 2023 16:11:15 +0200

"(" <[email-masked]> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]> writes:
>> Hmm that’s “incorrect”, no?
>>
>> Currently we have:
>>
>>   (match-record x <x>
>>     (field1 field2 …)
>>     body …)
>>
>> Do you mean to move the field list on the first line?
>
> Wait, that's intentional? :)  With this change, wouldn't it be:
>
> ```
> (match-record x <x>
>     (field1 field2)
>   body ...)
> ```
>
> which seems more in line with how other macros with bodies are typically
> indented.

Ah!  Dunno, to me the version you’re showing here looks “less natural”
because it’s a departure from ‘match’, which was the model here.

I understand this is all rather subjective…

Ludo’.