ambiguous ?

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <20974 at gryphon.COM> bagpiper at pnet02.gryphon.com (Michael Hunter) writes:
>In the following code fragment is line 3 ambiguous from an X3J11 standpoint
>or from a historical standpoint.
>3) func(Ret = func2(), Ret+30) ;

Both, because the order in which function arguments are evaluated has
always been implementation-dependent.  In fact I've seen both orders used.
Usually, the order is determined by the "natural" addressing order for the
way that functions push and pop off machine stacks, and both directions of
"natural" stack growth are commonly encountered.

>PS  What is the status of ANSI C?  Has the proposed standard passed the X3
>committee?  If so when and where can I get of copy of the standard (and for
>how much).  If not, how much longer does it appear that it will take for it to
>be passed.

Yes, X3 reaffirmed the technical side of the proposed ANSI standard for C.
All that remains is for Hansberry's procedural appeal to be considered.
>From a message received recently from Tom Plum (X3J11 Vice Chair):

	By the way, the X3J11 situation is that a meeting has been scheduled
	for the panel to hear the procedural appeal; it is set for 20 October.
	We certainly expect that X3J11 and X3 will be upheld by the panel,
	but there is not much more I can tell you.  If all goes well, we will
	reach the 15 December meeting of ANSI Board of Standards Review.

The proposed ANSI Standard is still the one described in the December 7, 1988
draft.  I believe it's available from Global Engineering Documents.