Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: := versus ==
Message-ID: <:1=4K26@ggpc2.ferranti.com>
Date: 4 Aug 90 19:31:24 GMT
References: <1990Jul30.143530.24295@phri.nyu.edu> <25684@cs.yale.edu> <7H+4AM6@xds13.ferranti.com> <3989@rtifs1.UUCP>
Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 19

In article <3989@rtifs1.UUCP> trt@rti.rti.org (Thomas Truscott) writes:
> I like the Q and PL/M features, but they don't stop me from typing:

> 	a == b + 1;	/* OOPS, I mean't to assign to a */

PL/M will. A naked expression is not a legal PL/M statement. You meant:

	a = b + a;

> 	if (a := b) ..	/* OOPS, I only wanted to compare them */

I think that is only legal is a and b are booleans. In any case, you want:

	if (a = b) ..

Back to the point.

If I was god and got to fix C, I'd make the indirection operator postfix
before playing with assignment and equality.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
+1 713 274 5180.   'U`
<peter@ficc.ferranti.com>