Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!purdue!bu-cs!buengc!bph
From: bph@buengc.BU.EDU (Blair P. Houghton)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: TO C OR NOT TO *C
Message-ID: <4644@buengc.BU.EDU>
Date: 25 Oct 89 03:33:11 GMT
References: <16107@nswitgould.cs.uts.oz> <1989Oct16.172249.18387@utzoo.uucp> <991@cirrusl.UUCP> <3775@condict.cs.vu.nl> <585@chem.ucsd.EDU>
Reply-To: bph@buengc.bu.edu (Blair P. Houghton)
Followup-To: comp.lang.c
Organization: Boston Univ. Col. of Eng.
Lines: 33

In article <585@chem.ucsd.EDU> tps@chem.ucsd.edu (Tom Stockfisch) writes:
>In article <3775@condict.cs.vu.nl> condict@cs.vu.nl (Michael Condict) writes:
>>This problem can be gotten around in C, using the ',' operator:
>>
>>	while (c = getc(stdin), !feof(stdin)) {
>>		.. do stuff with c ..
>>	}
>
>This doesn't always work:  for instance, if the first part is a statement.

	while ( ! getcandfeof(&c) ) {
		.. do stuff ..
	}

int getcandfeof( cptr )
char *cptr;
{
	*cptr = getc(stdin);
	return ( feof(stdin) );
}

Any number of statements can be stuffed into the function.
It's unfortunate that it adds yet more overhead, though.

>On all compilers I work on, there is the additional requirement (the
>standard not withstanding) that all operands of the comma operator be
>non-void.

What a lousy compiler.

				--Blair
				  "But I mean that in a nice
				   way, I really do."