public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "msimons at simons-clan dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/11633] g++ does not initialize structures when auto-increment variables are used Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:19:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20030722231958.9879.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20030722205341.11633.msimons@simons-clan.com> PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org. http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11633 ------- Additional Comments From msimons at simons-clan dot com 2003-07-22 23:19 ------- A friend pointed out language in the gcc.info file which appears to cover the 'comma' ordering case: === * Making side effects happen in the same order as in some other compiler. It is never safe to depend on the order of evaluation of side effects. For example, a function call like this may very well behave differently from one compiler to another: void func (int, int); int i = 2; func (i++, i++); There is no guarantee (in either the C or the C++ standard language definitions) that the increments will be evaluated in any particular order. Either increment might happen first. `func' might get the arguments `2, 3', or it might get `3, 2', or even `2, 2'. === I'm not sure if this applies here... and if it *does* apply it seems inconsistant that things like: ++foo-1, ++foo-1 ... foo++ + 0, foo++ + 0 ... and value(), value()... all get evaluated left to right, but foo++, foo++ value gets looked up once, and gets somehow the increment happens N times. I am very interested in what the c++ language lawyers have to say about this sample. If it is truely undefined I am *amazed* that practically all of the remaining commercial unix, c++ compilers do it the same way.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-22 23:19 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2003-07-22 20:53 [Bug c++/11633] New: " msimons at simons-clan dot com 2003-07-22 20:55 ` [Bug c++/11633] " msimons at simons-clan dot com 2003-07-22 21:41 ` bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-22 21:55 ` bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-22 22:10 ` msimons at simons-clan dot com 2003-07-22 23:19 ` msimons at simons-clan dot com [this message] 2003-07-22 23:36 ` bangerth at dealii dot org 2003-07-23 1:09 ` msimons at simons-clan dot com 2003-07-23 9:04 ` nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-08-23 17:11 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-11-21 16:55 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-11-21 16:57 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-04-30 1:47 ` [Bug c++/11633] [DR 430] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-04-30 18:17 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20030722231958.9879.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).