precedence of && (was: precedence of ?:)
Maarten Litmaath
maart at cs.vu.nl
Thu Sep 14 01:36:56 AEST 1989
gwyn at smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes:
\... there is no legal way to parse
\ 0 && i = 0
\as
\ (0 && i) = 0
\but there is a legal parse as
\ 0 && (i = 0)
gcc (ANSI or what?) does accept
0 ? 0 : i = 0
but it does NOT accept
0 && i = 0
In fact, I've never used a C compiler that accepted the latter construct.
Of course I fully agree it should be accepted.
--
creat(2) shouldn't have been create(2): |Maarten Litmaath @ VU Amsterdam:
it shouldn't have existed at all. |maart at cs.vu.nl, mcvax!botter!maart
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list