Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site fortune.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!eagle!mhuxl!ihnp4!fortune!olson
From: olson@fortune.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: & operator - (nf)
Message-ID: <1974@fortune.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Dec-83 19:14:12 EST
Article-I.D.: fortune.1974
Posted: Wed Dec 14 19:14:12 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 16-Dec-83 03:01:51 EST
Sender: notes@fortune.UUCP
Organization: Fortune Systems, Redwood City, CA
Lines: 18

#R:iwu1a:-16200:fortune:16200013:000:584
fortune!olson    Dec 14 15:36:00 1983

I would have to disagree with chris as to what should be assigned by:
	char *in, *out, buf[];
	in = buf;
	out = &(*in++);
since he forgot the parentheses.  Given the parentheses, out SHOULD
be set buf+1; that is, 'in' is incremented BEFORE the & operator is
applied.

(The original article did not include the second line of my example,
and asked whether out should be set to 'in', or 'in+1'.  The answer
is of course 'in'.  The question is not meaningful as stated.  The
question should be: does it point to the ORIGINAL value of 'in', or
the incremented value of 'in'.)
	Dave Olson