Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!uupsi!fozzie!stanley
From: stanley@phoenix.com (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: One more point regarding = and == (more flamage)
Message-ID: <NNwBZ1w163w@phoenix.com>
Date: 24 Mar 91 19:43:46 GMT
References: <1991Mar24.012959.9629@dsuvax.uucp>
Organization: Mad Scientist
Lines: 14

ghelmer@dsuvax.uucp (Guy Helmer) writes:

> In <1991Mar22.161333.24290@dg-rtp.dg.com> hagins@gamecock.rtp.dg.com (Jody Ha
> >Well, I'm not Henry, but I definitely agree here!  Also, Borland seems
> >to agree here as well, since while(*foo++ = *bar++); will generate a 
>                                                     ^
> >warning message.
> 
> It would be nice to have a compiler that would flag unintended empty
> statements, too :-)

   If you can write a compiler that can tell the difference between
intended and unintended empty statements, why not write one that writes
the code, too? :-)