Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc.

hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker)
Tue, 8 Aug 1995 00:38:29 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[9 earlier articles]
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. Steve_Kilbane@cegelecproj.co.uk (1995-07-26)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. chase@centerline.com (1995-07-28)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. davids@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (1995-07-30)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. dave@occl-cam.demon.co.uk (Dave Lloyd) (1995-07-31)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. jthill@netcom.com (1995-08-03)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. chase@centerline.com (1995-08-07)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. hbaker@netcom.com (1995-08-08)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. graham.matthews@pell.anu.edu.au (1995-08-08)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. det@sw.stratus.com (David Toland) (1995-08-08)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. jthill@netcom.com (1995-08-10)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. chase@centerline.com (1995-08-11)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. mfinney@inmind.com (1995-08-10)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. hbaker@netcom.com (1995-08-10)
[27 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: hbaker@netcom.com (Henry Baker)
Keywords: design
Organization: nil organization
References: 95-07-068 95-08-055
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 00:38:29 GMT

jthill@netcom.com (Jim Hill) wrote:


> I'd say leave it unspecified. If a programmer needs that level of control
> they can just write them as separate statements in sequence.


Uh... Isn't this just assembly language?? (I looked for it, but couldn't
find the smiley anywhere...).


--
www/ftp directory:
ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/hb/hbaker/home.html
--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.