Article View: comp.std.c
Article #2613Re: Unary plus
From: Doug Gwyn
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1991 21:57
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1991 21:57
12 lines
1004 bytes
1004 bytes
In article <370@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au> michi@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au (Michael Henning) writes: >It basically states that the unary plus operator may be used to force >a particular order of evaluation. No, that was proposed in early drafts of the standard, but was dropped in favor of requiring "honoring of parentheses" (a la Fortran) instead. >If I want to enforce evaluation order by assigning to temporary variables, ... Don't do that, use parentheses instead. For finer-grained control you can use volatile, but that should not be used merely to control subexpression evaluation order.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<15604@smoke.brl.mil>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwynReferences:
<370@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: Unary plus Keywords: unary plus, semantics of, order of evaluation Message-ID: <15604@smoke.brl.mil> Date: 27 Mar 91 21:57:52 GMT References: <370@ptcburp.ptcbu.oz.au> Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD. Lines: 12