Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: sequence points
Message-ID: <13269@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 29 Jun 90 09:33:49 GMT
References: <1988@mcrware.UUCP> <103459@convex.convex.com> <1822@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 13

In article <1822@tkou02.enet.dec.com> diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com (diamond@tkovoa) writes:
>Is there a sequence point after the return from the actual call?  I would
>guess not, by default, since the standard does not say.  Would the committee
>have put one there if they had thought of this problem?  Maybe the
>interpretation committee will decide that that it is just an editorial matter
>and tell us that the standard does say something about it?

First tell us what "the problem" is supposed to be.  The only issue
regarding this that I am aware of that is not 100% clear concerns
whether the license granted for assignment can creep into the body
of a function used in the RHS.  There is a request for interpretation
still pending on this.  If you see some other problem, submit a
request for interpretation.