Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!ucsd!pacbell.com!decwrl!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!hacgate!ashtate!tomr
From: tomr@ashtate (Tom Rombouts)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: stack quirk?
Message-ID: <1071@ashton.UUCP>
Date: 31 Jul 90 23:29:34 GMT
References: <4047@pikes.Colorado.EDU> <31530012@hpcvia.CV.HP.COM> <359@taumet.com>
Reply-To: tomr@ashton.UUCP (Tom Rombouts)
Organization: Ashton-Tate, Torrance, CA
Lines: 15

In article <359@taumet.com> steve@taumet.com (Stephen Clamage) writes:
>brianh@hpcvia.CV.HP.COM (brian_helterline) writes:
>
>|>printf("\n%d %d\n", ++i, ++i);
>
>There is no guarantee in what order ++i and i++ will be evaluated,

Just to tie this into the recent "value of lint" thread, this is
exactly the type of thing that a good lint will flag.  ("Warning:
expression depends on order of evaluation", etc.)  Readers of this
group may remember a "bug" fragment of code from MSC 5.1 to 6.0
that seemed to operate differently a few months ago that Gimpel
PC-Lint correctly flagged.

Tom Rombouts  Torrance Techie  tomr@ashtate.A-T.com  V:(213) 538-7108