Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: ambiguous ?
Message-ID: <11318@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 17 Oct 89 04:59:19 GMT
References: <11312@smoke.BRL.MIL> <14089@lanl.gov>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 16

In article <14089@lanl.gov> jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>From article <11312@smoke.BRL.MIL>, by gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn):
>> Both, because the order in which function arguments are evaluated has
>> always been implementation-dependent.  [...]
>Maybe that's what it has "always" been - but the ANSI standard says
>different.

You should not try to explain to others concepts with which you
obviously disagree, because you let your personal bias get in the way.

What I said is absolutely correct, and agrees with the Standard.
Perhaps you don't know what "dependent" means?

The proposed ANSI Standard for C leaves the order of argument
evaluation unspecified, thus it depends on the implementation.
This is indeed the way it always has been.