Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Pointers and Sequence Point |
| Date | 2011-05-03 17:45 +0300 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <8739kvyh9x.fsf@bazspaz.fatphil.org> (permalink) |
| References | <4dbe97cd$0$311$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <ipmdaj$8dk$1@dont-email.me> <rdCdnW-tt8vIdiPQnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d@bestweb.net> |
Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> writes: > On 5/2/2011 9:58 AM, Martin Ambuhl wrote: > > On 5/2/2011 7:38 AM, arnuld wrote: > >> I have this program which is causing confusion to me. I am told that last > >> printf() of main() will always print "Second", not "First". I think line: > >> > >> x = myAlloc(x); > > > > While it is possible to write evil code in which myAlloc could modify x, in > > C myAlloc receives a copy of the value of x and has no clue where x is or > > how to modify it. There are not two or more instances of modifying x between > > sequence points. > > But, unless I'm badly mistaken (and I know I'll be told so if I am), > the call to and a return from a function are sequence points. > Therefore, as long as myAlloc() is a function and not a macro, even > this does not invoke UB: > > x = myAlloc(x++); > > >> is UB. My colleague is disagreeing on this while I was saying that its UB > >> because there is no sequence point here. It is just like using this line: > > The function call is a sequence point. At least 2. One between the evaluation of the parameters and the call, and one at the return of the function. Phil -- "At least you know where you are with Microsoft." "True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle." -- Matthew Vernon
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Pointers and Sequence Point arnuld <sunrise@invalid.address> - 2011-05-02 11:38 +0000
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-05-02 08:23 -0400
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point Martin Ambuhl <mambuhl@earthlink.net> - 2011-05-02 09:58 -0400
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2011-05-02 09:36 -0700
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-05-02 17:21 +0000
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-05-02 23:20 -0400
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-05-02 23:26 -0700
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-05-03 05:33 -0400
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-05-02 13:35 -0400
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-03 17:45 +0300
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2011-05-02 10:17 -0700
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-02 10:31 -0700
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point "Morris Keesan" <mkeesan@post.harvard.edu> - 2011-05-02 20:55 -0400
Re: Pointers and Sequence Point David Resnick <lndresnick@gmail.com> - 2011-05-03 08:01 -0700
csiph-web