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>
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

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