Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!fernwood!hercules!apple!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Order of Evaluation (plus ?'s)
Message-ID: <11654@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 19 Nov 89 08:57:12 GMT
References: <21265@usc.edu> <13871@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 16

In article <13871@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> bailey@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU.UUCP (Kirk Bailey) writes:
-I'm curious about the fate of the changed floating point evaluation
-constraints which were a part of some of the intermediate dpANSI "C" documents;
-the idea being that the programmer could be assured of a fixed evaluation
-order without requiring the use of temps.  The current doc's I have seem to
-no longer mention this (or the synchronization aspect of unary '+')?

Unary + is no longer the way to do this.  Use parentheses instead.

-On an unrelated front:  Is it conforming practice to cast the value returned
-from a function call to void when the function returns a struct or union?
-Granted that a nice compiler will allow this, I can't find anything explicit
-about it in the std...

If it is allowed by the grammar and does not violate Constraints or
Semantics, then it is allowed in a strictly conforming program.