Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Would *you* get caught by this one?
Keywords: Assignops
Message-ID: <9385@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 15 Jan 89 16:37:20 GMT
References: <139@mole-end.UUCP> <144@mole-end.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 10

In article <144@mole-end.UUCP> mat@mole-end.UUCP (Mark A Terribile) writes:
>Yes, they do.  Given that the issue isn't directly addressed in either K&R,

It most certainly is!  a op= b is the same as a = a op b except that
a is evaluated only once.  That has been the definition since before
K&R first edition, and of course the pANS doesn't change that.

Certainly, some compilers (including several versions of PCC)
got it wrong.  That may be reason to avoid this in your source
code, but it doesn't affect the definition of op=.