🚀 go-pugleaf

To the question:

> > > Is `i + (f(),i+i)' well defined? 

Chris Volpe (volpe@ausable.crd.ge.com) writes:

> It must yield one of two values, in an unspecified way, depending on which
> of the two operands of the top-level "+" is evaluated first. (I've lost
> some context here, but I assume f() modifies i.)  I wouldn't call this
> "well-defined", but it does not invoke undefined behavior either.

I agree with everything here and, I believe, in the rest of Chris's long
article, *except* the implication that one of the two operands of the
top-level + must be evaluated first.  I don't think Chris really meant to
make that implication.  The evaluation sequence

	f()
	left-hand i
	right-hand i
	right-hand +
	top-level +

is one of the possibilities, and the left-hand operand of the top-level +
is evaluated within the time that the right-hand operand is being done.
-- 
Mark Brader          \ Peter Neumann on updating software to work after 1999:
msb@sq.com            \ This problem gives new meaning to "going out on a date" 
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto \ (which many systems will do on 1/1/00).

My text in this article is in the public domain.