Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Possible C Anomaly
Message-ID: <6421@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 12-Sep-87 16:06:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6421
Posted: Sat Sep 12 16:06:54 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 13-Sep-87 08:39:33 EDT
References: <9236@brl-adm.ARPA>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 16

In article <9236@brl-adm.ARPA> gamma@EDN-UNIX.arpa (W. J. Showalter) writes:
>   k = k--;

Your real problem is the assumption that this is a meaningful thing to do.
(Are you really trying to keep k unchanged in such a complicated way?)
You need to watch out for these "this construct is equivalent to" claims;
usually there are subtle inequivalencies.  For example, one you haven't
noticed concerns the way different types are combined in producing the
result of a ?: expression.

>... I tried 3 different compilers on 3 different machine
>architectures and they all handle it the same way.

Most PCC-based compilers probably would produce the same result,
but that's "just an accident" -- it's not guaranteed by the language
specification.