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

pardo@cs.washington.edu (David Keppel)
Fri, 25 Aug 1995 00:43:27 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[37 earlier articles]
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. burley@gnu.ai.mit.edu (1995-08-23)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. jthill@netcom.com (1995-08-24)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. hbaker@netcom.com (1995-08-23)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. way@cis.udel.edu (Thomas Way) (1995-08-23)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. jmccarty@spdmail.spd.dsccc.com (1995-08-24)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. daniels@cse.ogi.edu (1995-08-24)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. pardo@cs.washington.edu (1995-08-25)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. hbaker@netcom.com (1995-08-25)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. jan@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de (1995-08-25)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. stefan.monnier@epfl.ch (Stefan Monnier) (1995-08-28)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. chase@centerline.com (1995-08-28)
Re: Order of argument evaluation in C++, etc. hbaker@netcom.com (1995-08-30)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
From: pardo@cs.washington.edu (David Keppel)
Keywords: C++, optimize
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
References: <95-07-068@comp.compilers 95-08-171
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 1995 00:43:27 GMT

Somebody wrote:
>[I liked the C compiler that had `if (x=y)' warn, `if ((x=y))' quiet.]


Which, unfortunately, eliminates the (very desirable) warning if you're
using well-parenthesized but erronious macros.


;-D on ( Mac Row ) Pardo


--

Post a followup to this message

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