Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!decvax!ima!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: printf() problem
Keywords: C printf
Message-ID: <12815@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Date: 27 Apr 89 02:19:33 GMT
References: <11657@hodge.UUCP> <89Apr26.092233edt.18850@me.utoronto.ca>
Reply-To: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Organization: Interactive Systems, Boston
Lines: 12

In article <89Apr26.092233edt.18850@me.utoronto.ca> zougas@hammer.me.UUCP (Athanasios(Tom) Zougas) writes:
>In article <11657@hodge.UUCP> jdm@hodge.UUCP (jdm) writes:
>>        printf("%x %x %x %x\n", getc(fp), getc(fp), getc(fp), getc(fp));
>>[was found to evaluate the rightmost getc() first.]
>
>It would happen in any C.

No.  Not all hardware has a downward-growing stack, and even on those that do,
not all C compilers evaluate function arguments in the same order that they
are pushed.

Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint