Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihlpg.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ihlpg!tainter
From: tainter@ihlpg.UUCP (Tainter)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: *p++ = *p and more
Message-ID: <1771@ihlpg.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-Apr-86 18:46:38 EST
Article-I.D.: ihlpg.1771
Posted: Thu Apr  3 18:46:38 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 5-Apr-86 11:22:35 EST
References: <16634@rochester.ARPA> <139200024@uiucdcsb>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 15

> I think compilers can do the post-increment anytime they feel like it
> with in the statement.     The semantics of a[i] = b[i++];   isn't
> defined so the compiler can do whatever it wants.  Even if that means
> that both i's are evaluated before the increment is done.
> Bill Smith
> ihnp4!uiucdcs!wsmith

According to K&R page 42 section 2.8
     ....But the  expression ++n increments n 'before' using its value, while
     n++ increments n after its value has been used.

SO any time they feel like it is not valid.  Indexing a[i] first or
indexing b[i] first IS valid, but b is indexed with the value of i BEFORE
i is incremented.  a can be index either before or after i is incremented.
--j.a.tainter