Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!ittc!fpb From: fpb@ittc.wec.com (Frank P. Bresz) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Evaluation of if's Message-ID: Date: 6 Jun 91 13:03:20 GMT Article-I.D.: ittc.FPB.91Jun6090320 References: <1991Jun4.233928.5185@athena.mit.edu> <1991Jun5.014758.10616@wdl1.wdl.loral.com> Sender: news@ittc.wec.com Distribution: usa Organization: Westinghouse, ITTC, Pgh, PA. Lines: 34 In-reply-to: bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com's message of 5 Jun 91 01:47:58 GMT In article <1991Jun5.014758.10616@wdl1.wdl.loral.com> bard@cutter.ssd.loral.com (J H Woodyatt) writes: [ some of the thread removed ] >Is this really undefined by ANSI? I suppose we need someone with the STANDARD to >resolve this. (I'm politely assuming that there is a good reason for wanting to >though I'm unable to think of one.) I am guessing you mean why in heaven's name do I want to do this, when it's blatantly ridiculous. Well actually since the post is for a friend I don't, and in fact neither does he. He is using C++ and this code is generated for him from the C++ preprocessor. (AT&T I think). He is however C literate (unlike some others in his organization), and delved into the generated C to try and decide why their code was behaving differently on 2 different machines. This is a small test he created showing the problem. The other C++ people in his group of course thought that clearly one of the compiler vendors must be wrong and that they should be able to call someone to get this fixed (yes corporate mindset). He wanted to isolate it to a programmer misunderstanding (which it is). On the C++ side it was not as blatantly ridiculous (or so he tells me). Thank you all very much. -- | () () () | Frank P. Bresz | Westinghouse Electric Corporation | \ /\ / | fpb@ittc.wec.com | ITTC Simulators Department | \/ \/ | uunet!ittc!fpb | Those who can, do. Those who can't, simulate. | ---------- | +1 412 733 6749 | My opinions are mine, WEC doesn't want 'em.