Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site brl-vgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!harpo!seismo!brl-tgr!brl-vgr!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-vgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: return expr and Decus-C
Message-ID: <1801@brl-vgr.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 11-May-84 06:54:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-vgr.1801
Posted: Fri May 11 06:54:30 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 12-May-84 11:41:35 EDT
References: <478@decvax.UUCP> <1514@brl-vgr.ARPA>, <1798@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistics Research Lab
Lines: 13

Yes,
	( expr )
is also an
	expr
which is why
	return( expr );
is legal although the definition is
	return expr;
However, stylistically I recommend leaving unnecessary parentheses off
the return expr since, as I said, they make it look like a function call.
Both ways are legal and this wouldn't be an important issue except that
some C compilers (apparently the DECUS C compiler) do not accept the
more general form.