Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site alice.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: C programming style
Message-ID: <4031@alice.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 20-Jul-85 11:44:58 EDT
Article-I.D.: alice.4031
Posted: Sat Jul 20 11:44:58 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 22-Jul-85 06:24:22 EDT
References: <646@rlvd.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Murray Hill
Lines: 22

> As an aside, I remember being taught AlgolW as a student, where i := i + 1
> and i := 1 + i were equvalent statements, and incremented i. I then moved to
> PL360 (yuk!) for a while where i := i + 1 inrements i, and i := 1 + i sets i
> to 2.

PL360 was unusual in that there was no operator precedence: all operators
(including assignment!) grouped to the left.  Thus i := 1 + i meant
(1) i := 1; (2) i := i + i;

Incidentally, it was possible in later versions of PL360 to increment i
by simply writing

	i + 1;

the idea being that writing an expression without an assignment
would use the first operand as its implicit destination.

And what about the =: operator?

	i + 1 =: j shl 2;

means: add 1 to i, put the result in j; now shift i left 2 bits.