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