Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!dogie.macc.wisc.edu!uwvax!rutgers!att!chinet!les
From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: comma operator:  keep away?
Message-ID: <8284@chinet.chi.il.us>
Date: 24 Apr 89 18:33:42 GMT
References: <19913@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <10092@smoke.BRL.MIL> <19926@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
Reply-To: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell)
Organization: Chinet - Public Access Unix
Lines: 18

In article <19926@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> bobmon@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (RAMontante) writes:
>->Is there a circumstance in which the comma operator is required, where
>->the compound statement cannot be broken into multiple statements?

>I said "required", not "useful".

How about the more common:

for (x=0, y=0; x <100 ; x++, y++) {
    stuff ...
}
 
Of course this could also be done other ways - the only thing "required"
in a programming language is an assignment and a test-and-branch operator.
The rest is merely "useful".

Les Mikesell