Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!think!ima!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <86900007@haddock>
Date: Sun, 10-Aug-86 21:21:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: haddock.86900007
Posted: Sun Aug 10 21:21:00 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 12-Aug-86 16:44:48 EDT
References: <273@watmath.UUCP>
Lines: 23
Nf-ID: #R:watmath.UUCP:273:haddock:86900007:000:830
Nf-From: haddock!karl    Aug 10 21:21:00 1986


[In the expression "cond ? voidf() : voidf()",]
>The void values are not thrown away!

True.  They are being passed to the ?: operator.

>Remember that (A?B:C) is an expression *returning a value*.

Yes, it is an expression (as opposed to a statement); however, some
expressions have type "void" (and no value).  This is (or should be)
one of them.

>C is giving the error because it can't determine the type.

No, it's giving the error because the compiler writer overlooked a case.
I'm glad X3J11 has fixed this.

Btw, a case where it could be useful (and where if...else won't do) is
"(cond ? voidf0() : voidf1()), intf2())" used in an integer context.  I
admit I have no plans to use this feature in the near future, but it's a
perfectly reasonable thing to allow.

Karl W. Z. Heuer (ihnp4!ima!haddock!karl), The Walking Lint