Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!ptsfa!lll-lcc!seismo!rochester!ken
From: ken@rochester.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Evaluating autoincrements in function calls
Message-ID: <25404@rochester.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 27-Feb-87 23:50:07 EST
Article-I.D.: rocheste.25404
Posted: Fri Feb 27 23:50:07 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Mar-87 15:21:32 EST
References: <4707@brl-adm.ARPA> <3279@rsch.WISC.EDU> <5604@mimsy.UUCP> <3285@rsch.WISC.EDU>
Reply-To: ken@rochester.UUCP (SKY)
Organization: U of Rochester, CS Dept, Rochester, NY
Lines: 11

|Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing that we should change it, I'm just
|trying to point out that it IS an inconsistency and that IS annoying.  If

Sure it is an inconsistency, but the point is nobody promised a fixed
evaluation order. Are you going to complain too that different compilers
have different MAXREALs? Or that '\f' isn't always 014? C does run
on EBCDIC machines you know.

Programmers can't blithely ignore limitations.

	Ken