Re: confusion about behavior

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: confusion about behavior
Date	Mon, 15 Aug 2011 01:57:25 +0000 (UTC)
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines	30
Message-ID	<pan.2011.08.15.01.57.26@gmail.com> (permalink)
References	<cda0e503-482a-4075-b3fa-af3013819716@l11g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <ln1uwn4xuc.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host	uqlV+6kNo2Z0TnMsKGN6tA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
X-Complaints-To	abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent	Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies)
X-Notice	Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.c:9411

Show key headers only | View raw

On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 12:06:19 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:

> LJ <djtheshowstopper@gmail.com> writes:
>> int     a = 2;
>> int     b = 3;
>> c = a+++b;
>> What will be the value of c??
>> Shouldn't it be undefined depending upon the interpretation??
> 
> In a professional environment, the result will be "go back and fix the
> code, then we'll look at it".
> 
> The assignment is equivalent to
> 
>     c = a++ + b;
> 
> due to the "maximal munch" rule (the same rule that makes "a+++++b" a
> syntax error rather than "a++ + ++b").  The code is badly formatted and
> difficult to read, but there is no ambiguity.
> 
> I'll assume that's enough to tell you what the code does.  If not, feel
> free to ask.

So, you're saying that it will first increment a by 1, then add the 
result to b?

What prevents it from being interpreted as a + ++b? Nevermind, I just 
realized that you get the same result either way.

Todd

Thread

confusion about behavior LJ <djtheshowstopper@gmail.com> - 2011-08-14 11:56 -0700
  Re: confusion about behavior China Blue Tip Wrench <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-14 12:05 -0700
  Re: confusion about behavior Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-14 12:06 -0700
    Re: confusion about behavior Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-15 01:57 +0000
      Re: confusion about behavior Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-14 19:10 -0700
        Re: confusion about behavior Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-15 03:44 +0100
          Re: confusion about behavior Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-14 20:27 -0700
      Re: confusion about behavior Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-08-14 22:52 -0400
      Re: confusion about behavior Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-15 04:28 +0000
        Re: confusion about behavior Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-08-15 15:31 -0400
          Re: confusion about behavior Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-15 12:36 -0700
          Re: confusion about behavior Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-08-15 20:33 +0000
            Re: confusion about behavior Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-08-16 14:39 -0400
              Re: confusion about behavior Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-16 12:27 -0700
                Re: confusion about behavior Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-08-16 19:47 +0000
      Re: confusion about behavior Barry Schwarz <schwarz45@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-05 04:50 -0700
        [OT] Re: confusion about behavior Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-09-05 09:07 -0400
        Re: confusion about behavior Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-09-06 12:42 -0400
  Re: confusion about behavior James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-14 15:10 -0400
    Re: confusion about behavior Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-15 02:04 +0000
      Re: confusion about behavior Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-08-14 19:15 -0700
        Re: confusion about behavior Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-15 02:34 +0000
      Re: confusion about behavior James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-08-14 22:37 -0400
    Re: confusion about behavior Todd Carnes <toddcarnes@gmail.com> - 2011-08-15 02:26 +0000

csiph-web