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: <11400@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 24 Oct 89 20:08:24 GMT
References: <11388@smoke.BRL.MIL> <483@idacrd.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 15

In article <483@idacrd.UUCP> desj@idacrd.UUCP (David desJardins) writes:
-From article <11388@smoke.BRL.MIL>, by gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn):
-> The mathematical formalisms to which you allude do not deal with
-> side effects, which is the only thing that makes evaluation order
-> an issue.
-   I don't agree with this.  Efficiency can also be a major issue.  It
-makes sense to say that you want one expression evaluated first if you
-expect that the second one is more expensive to evaluate and/or less
-likely to be needed.

You must have missed my point; check out the article to which I was
replying, then re-read my response.

I wasn't talking about whether or not control of evaluation order
is DESIRABLE.  The case you argue is one that I basically agree with.