Theory of Pure C, chapter 937 - (nf)
utzoo!decvax!harpo!floyd!cmcl2!philabs!sdcsvax!ajh
utzoo!decvax!harpo!floyd!cmcl2!philabs!sdcsvax!ajh
Thu Dec 23 14:16:14 AEST 1982
Since I'm neither a C expert nor a language wizard,
I'm not sure how correct this is, but it would seem
logical to have:
tmp:=x; x++; bar(tmp)
because if you had bar(a+b), you would evaluate a+b
first, and then call bar. By the same reasoning,
you should "evaluate" x++ first, returning a value
of x and incrementing x, and then call bar.
Alan J. Hu
...ucbvax!sdcsvax!ajh (or something like that)
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list