Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!gatech!seismo!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccird1!rb
From: rb@ccird1.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Additions to C - range checking
Message-ID: <523@ccird1.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 23-Jun-86 23:58:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccird1.523
Posted: Mon Jun 23 23:58:55 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 28-Jun-86 05:09:13 EDT
Reply-To: rb@ccird1.UUCP (Rex Ballard)
Distribution: net
Organization: CCI Rochester Development, Rochester NY
Lines: 24

One common reference that kills is the old "is this in range"
test.

typically, this is written:

if((5<a)&&(a<50)) do_something(a);

suppose instead of a, you use a->b->c->d, all that pointer
arithmetic gets done twice? (maybe it is optimized but its harder
to read).

How about:

if (5<a<50) do_something(a);

this would currently be interpreted as

if((5<a)<50).  since, if a=100 (5<a) evaluates to 1 and 1<50, it
is true for any number greater than 5 right?

this can be real useful for pre-checking an array bounds, a
int (f[])(); type switch, and even skipping over a case statement.

Is this impossible to parse?