🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <403@vixie.UUCP> paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) writes:
 ...
>In testdata.c, I found:
>
>	if (no_eoln = (*argv[1] == '-' && *++argv[1] == 'n')) {
>
>Now, since C doesn't guarantee order of evaluation, this seems blatently
>wrong.  I don't know neccessarily that this is the cause of my problem,
>but if the rest of the code has errors like this, I don't want to bother
>trying to find the cause of the core dumps.  Mission: Impossible :-), and
>I refuse to accept it.

You are suffering from an all too common misconception.  There are several
clearly documented operators for which the order of evaluation IS guaranteed,
and && is one of them.  I quote from section 7.11 (pg. 190) of K&R:

	Unlike &, && guarantees left-to-right evaluation;  moreover
	the second operand is not evaluated if the first operand is 0.

There may well be bugs in multivol, but the example quoted above isn't one
of them.
-- 
Larry Campbell                                The Boston Software Works, Inc.
Internet: campbell@maynard.bsw.com          120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109
uucp: {alliant,wjh12}!maynard!campbell              +1 617 367 6846
ARPA: campbell%maynard.uucp@harvisr.harvard.edu      MCI: LCAMPBELL