home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: ix.netcom.com!netnews
- From: miker3@ix.netcom.com (Mike Rubenstein)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Q:order of evaluation
- Date: Sat, 27 Jan 1996 04:19:05 GMT
- Organization: Netcom
- Message-ID: <3109a71f.17721792@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
- References: <4ec59t$f3n@news.nstn.ca>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-dc17-13.ix.netcom.com
- X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Jan 26 8:19:16 PM PST 1996
- X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99c/16.141
-
- nstn181a@fox.nstn.ca (Pierre G. Boutquin) wrote:
-
- > In <4eb6kq$ksf@gazette.tandem.com>, yun_yeogirl writes:
- > >Michael M Rubenstein wrote :
- > >
- > > [Example:
- > > i = v[i++]; // the behavior is undefined
- > > i = 7,i++,i++; // `i' becomes 9
- > >
- > > i = ++i + 1; // the behavior is undefined
- > > i = i + 1; // the value of 'i' is incremented
- > >
- > >The first and third statement seem clear to me. I don't see why they are
- > >undefined. I guess you made a typo here. Maybe you meant :
- > >
- > > i + v[i++] and i + (++i + 1).
- > >
- > >If I am wrong, please enlighten me.
- >
- > You _are_ wrong. They seem clear, but are undefined _by convention_.
- > i = v[i++]; is given in ARM as an example at the start of Chapt. 5.
-
- Please try and get your quotes right. None of this is mine. Only the
- example is from my post and that I copied from the draft.
-
- My post clearly (I hope) presented the same view that you espouse.
-
-
- Michael M Rubenstein
-