Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbneb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!cbosgd!cbsck!cbscc!cbneb!adm
From: adm@cbneb.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: C subscripts
Message-ID: <1575@cbneb.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 28-Oct-84 14:20:29 EST
Article-I.D.: cbneb.1575
Posted: Sun Oct 28 14:20:29 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 1-Nov-84 03:54:58 EST
Sender: adm@cbneb.UUCP
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, OHIO
Lines: 9
Nf-ID: #R:mouton:-19500:cbnap:16200006:000:367
Nf-From: cbnap!whp    Oct 28 14:03:00 1984

>Now, BEFROE the flames start I KNOW the comma operator exists.
>This is not overloading because subscripts are expressions, not statements.
>So don't start quoting K&R pg 192 to me.

You're wrong; it IS overloading BECAUSE subscripts are expressions.
Thus, "array[t=3, t+2]" is equivalent to "array[5]".  Your proposed use of
the comma would therefore be ambiguous.