Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!paperboy!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: The irregularity of the ?: operator
Message-ID: <16030@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 2 May 91 02:56:15 GMT
References: <RICHARD.91Apr17193717@euler.iesd.auc.dk>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 16

In article <RICHARD.91Apr17193717@euler.iesd.auc.dk> richard@iesd.auc.dk (Richard Flamsholt S0rensen) writes:
>  According to the syntax,
>	x == 0 ? c = 2 : c = 4;
>  is illegal, because it is parsed as
>	(x == 0 ? c = 2 : c) = 4;
>  Everyone (well, almost - otherwise there wouldn't be any discussions
>here on c.l.c :-) has acknowlegded, that this is correct.

Then "everyone" is wrong.

The LHS of an assignment expression must be a unary expression;
thus, your suggested parse is incorrect.

The example is unparsable according to the official C grammar.
By judicious addition of parentheses you could make it parse in
at least four distinct ways.