Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Function Argument Evaluation
Message-ID: <15538@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 21 Mar 91 00:59:46 GMT
References: <7621@polstra.UUCP> <17750@crdgw1.crd.ge.com>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 5

In article <17750@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> volpe@camelback.crd.ge.com (Christopher R Volpe) writes:
>So, the output has to be "100 200".

Wrong.  "200 200" is a possible output from a conforming implementation.
I thought the cited section of the standard was unusually clear about this.