|writing a compiler... ltk_RE_MO_VE_@libero.it (Tommy) (2003-06-03)|
|Re: writing a compiler... firstname.lastname@example.org (Vasile Rotaru) (2003-06-05)|
|Re: writing a compiler... email@example.com (2003-06-05)|
|Re: writing a compiler... JeffKenton@attbi.com (Jeff Kenton) (2003-06-05)|
|Re: writing a compiler... cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2003-06-05)|
|Re: writing a compiler... Steve_Lipscombe@amat.com (2003-06-08)|
|Re: writing a compiler... firstname.lastname@example.org (2003-06-20)|
|Re: writing a compiler... Conor.ONeill.NoSpamPlease@logicacmg.com (Conor O'Neill) (2003-06-20)|
|Re: writing a compiler... email@example.com (Lex Spoon) (2003-06-25)|
|Date:||20 Jun 2003 00:07:01 -0400|
|Organization:||AOL Bertelsmann Online GmbH & Co. KG http://www.germany.aol.com|
|Posted-Date:||20 Jun 2003 00:07:01 EDT|
, Steve_Lipscombe@amat.com schreibt:
>Pascal does allow this. Why not? Or, to put it another way, why would
>you expect or assume that the functions would be executed in any
I just encountered an very nasty case in the composition of an string.
str := f1() + f2() + f3();
when the compiler changes the evaluation order, and the functions read
sequential information from the same stream. It's annoying when such a
statement has to be broken into multiple statements, in order to force
the required evaluation order, without any obvious reason.
Of course this is a matter of side effects, but I was very confused
when I found that problem for the first time, after decades of coding
in this way...
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.