From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4334 invoked by alias); 21 Feb 2002 16:37:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-prs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-prs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 4293 invoked by uid 61); 21 Feb 2002 16:37:25 -0000 Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:40:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20020221163725.4292.qmail@sources.redhat.com> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, ggs@homer.att.com, nobody@gcc.gnu.org From: jakub@gcc.gnu.org Reply-To: jakub@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, ggs@homer.att.com, nobody@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailer: gnatsweb 2.9.3 Subject: Re: c/4978: invalid expression evaluation in gcc X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00547.txt.bz2 List-Id: Synopsis: invalid expression evaluation in gcc State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed State-Changed-By: jakub State-Changed-When: Thu Feb 21 08:37:24 2002 State-Changed-Why: There is no sequence point in C after first operand of < operator, so your testcase has undefined behaviour. See ISO C99 Annex C, for example. There are sequence points after first operand of comma and at the end of if controlling expression, but there is nothing which requires < operands to be evaluated in any specific order. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=4978