Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mips:1296 comp.std.c:4164
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!servitude!rogerk
From: rogerk@mips.COM (Roger B.A. Klorese)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mips,comp.std.c
Subject: Re: compiler bug
Keywords: structures, addressable
Message-ID: <487@spim.mips.COM>
Date: 23 Jan 91 23:51:58 GMT
References: <1685@svin02.info.win.tue.nl> <1991Jan23.031214.544@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
Sender: news@mips.COM
Followup-To: comp.sys.mips
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 19
Nntp-Posting-Host: servitude.mips.com

In article <1991Jan23.031214.544@tkou02.enet.dec.com> diamond@jit345.enet@tkou02.enet.dec.com (Norman Diamond) writes:
>In ANSI C, (d=e) is a perfectly legal non-lvalue value, therefore (d=e).b
>is also a perfectly legal non-lvalue value.
>(d=e),d.b  also yields a perfectly legal non-lvalue value, so I would
>agree with your suggestion that it should be equivalent.
>
>In K&R-I, the left operand of "." had to be an lvalue.  Therefore, if your
>vendor does not claim ANSI conformance, it might not be a compiler bug.

And, of course, MIPS-C claims K&R-I compliance only.  This reference is
accepted in the new ANSI C compiler which is in beta test.  (Sorry, we
have a full complement of test sites, and are not accepting any more.)
It is accepted in the K&R mode of the 2.20 compilers as well, as of now;
we will check if this should be rejected.
-- 
ROGER B.A. KLORESE                                  MIPS Computer Systems, Inc.
MS 6-05    930 DeGuigne Dr.   Sunnyvale, CA  94086              +1 408 524-7421
rogerk@mips.COM         {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!rogerk         "I'm the NLA"
"WAR: been there, done that... hated it."  -- QueerPeace/DAGGER chant