Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: GCC hasn't even gotten around to sequencing argument evaluation yet???
Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2022 22:34:26 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 52
Message-ID: <87ee25o61p.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References: <t28g93$cou$1@dont-email.me> <t2tl3g$m3p$1@gioia.aioe.org> <cbee23ef-06aa-4e42-b4d6-2091994720ebn@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="135db30b784175e4173309be2d7db731"; logging-data="31493"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18r39Oxp0POZfeL99hBiopo"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9J5SMbZMx1jk0Q2igbk3a06lapw= sha1:jntRdVD5IEVA2nDdCO91736HwPQ=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:83556

"james...@alumni.caltech.edu" <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 12:06:23 AM UTC-4, Christian Hanné wrote:
>> Am 02.04.2022 um 05:34 schrieb Andrey Tarasevich: 
>> >   #include <iostream> 
>> > 
>> >   int foo(int a, int b) 
>> >   { 
>> >     return a + b; 
>> >   } 
>> > 
>> >   int main() 
>> >   { 
>> >     int i = 1; 
>> >     int r = foo(++i, ++i); 
>> >     std::cout << r << std::endl; 
>> >   } 
>> > 
>> > This outputs 6 in GCC 11.2 in `-std=c++17` mode and later. WTF? ... 
>> 
>> The ++i's are taken ordered from left to right since the 
>> first C version.
>
> Citation, please?
>
> My copy of the C90 standard says "The order of evaluation of the
> function designator, the arguments, and subexpressions within the
> arguments is unspecified, but there is a sequence point before the
> actual call." (6.3.2.2).
>
> My copy of "The C Programming Language", 1st edition, says "The
> order of evaluation of arguments is undefined by the language; take
> note that the various compilers differ." Appendix A, sectiojn 7.1.
>
> How do your sources differ from mine?

Christian Hanné's sources differ from yours in that you are not a troll.
Christian Hanné has a history of posting deliberate misinformation here.
It's not plausible that he's merely mistaken; his lies indicate that he
knows the truth.

The particular nonsense of his that landed him in my killfile a year and
a half ago was:

    Convertion to uintptr_t involves a privilege-check to the page
    addressed. That's not true for conversions to ptrdiff_t or size_t.

(I presume he thinks he's being clever.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Philips
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */