Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| Path | csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Sun, 06 May 2012 07:53:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <4FA67433.60EC@mindspring.com> (permalink) |
| Date | Sun, 06 May 2012 08:53:07 -0400 |
| From | pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> |
| Reply-To | pfiland@mindspring.com |
| Organization | PF |
| X-Mailer | Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; I) |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: pointer arithmetic question. |
| References | <8d75171a-27cf-45ac-b9f4-57427d79b0d6@h4g2000pbe.googlegroups.com> |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| Lines | 49 |
| X-Usenet-Provider | http://www.giganews.com |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 4.154.222.208 |
| X-Trace | sv3-KTHJ2zfvROXeRK+BLPHn0SuYCewW1XG6V8nehmVaGsOK5uca7WXabh7Axh2Ty+bVJSbu27kv8OHyQyX!jdjmSheV4/52BxWWFbTJdBoSFowKmqP0/EfOKeYiEUbnuchSNAV493OvkgckxU6rugaB7OZV0XO6!SXSaelLnVB4= |
| X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info | Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers |
| X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info | Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly |
| X-Postfilter | 1.3.40 |
| X-Original-Bytes | 2304 |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.c:20420 |
Show key headers only | View raw
somenath wrote: > > Hi All, > > The following program is crashing. > char s[] ="test"; > char *t=s; > *t = toupper(*t++); > //t++; The comment is interesting because it shows that you thought about doing it the right way. > But how that can happen also ? As post increment operator's side > effect will be taking effect after the sequence point in this case > after execution of the code *t = toupper(*t++); No. What is guaranteed, is that the side effects from the evaluation of the arguments in a function call, will be completed *before* the function call. n1570 6.5.2.2 Function calls Constraints 12 EXAMPLE In the function call (*pf[f1()]) (f2(), f3() + f4()) the functions f1, f2, f3, and f4 may be called in any order. All side effects have to be completed before the function pointed to by pf[f1()] is called. Do you have a copy of n1570? Also, for the above definition of (t), the opcode for this expression: (t++) may or may not be the same as the opcode for this expression: (++t, t-1). Whether the side effect takes place before or after the value of (t++)is determined, is up to the implementation. -- pete
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
pointer arithmetic question. somenath <somenathpal@gmail.com> - 2012-05-05 21:46 -0700
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2012-05-05 23:25 -0700
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2012-05-06 07:52 -0700
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-05-06 06:58 +0000
Re: pointer arithmetic question. pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2012-05-06 08:53 -0400
Re: pointer arithmetic question. pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2012-05-08 06:35 -0400
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-08 06:37 -0700
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-05-08 14:32 +0000
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-08 10:31 -0700
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-05-09 21:04 +0000
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-10 10:06 -0700
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-05-11 17:52 +0000
Re: pointer arithmetic question. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-05-11 19:27 -0700
csiph-web