This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: bizarre g++ behavior after reinstalling cygwin

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Brett Serkez wrote:

> <snip>
> > "i=i++" is either a no-op or nonsense, depending on the
> > interpretation. You should either use "i=i+1" or "i++" (those should
> > be equivalent in modern compilers).
> The strick interpretation of i=i++ starts by evaluating the right side
> "i++" to compute a r-value (right value).  Since the ++ is after the i,
> it is a post-operation, vs. if it were before the i, in which case it
> would be a pre-operation.   So first the value of i would be saved, then
> i incremented, then the saved value would be assigned to the l-value
> (left value) which in this case is i, setting i back to its original
> value.

Yes, that was the nonsence interpretation. :-)

> You could use "i=++i" which would increment i, then save the r- value
> and assign to the l-value, but then again, i++ would be much simplier,
> no?

Right.  But there may be other style mishaps in Vadim's code that gcc 3.4
doesn't like.  We just don't know.
      |\      _,,,---,,_ |
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		Igor Peshansky, Ph.D. (name changed!)
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		old name: Igor Pechtchanski
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"Las! je suis sot... -Mais non, tu ne l'es pas, puisque tu t'en rends compte."
"But no -- you are no fool; you call yourself a fool, there's proof enough in
that!" -- Rostand, "Cyrano de Bergerac"

Unsubscribe info:
Problem reports:

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]