From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-117142-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 16870 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2005 16:32:49 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 16843 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jul 2005 16:32:44 -0000
Received: from h-68-164-203-246.nycmny83.covad.net (HELO dberlin.org) (68.164.203.246)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:32:44 +0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (HELO localhost)
  by dberlin.org (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4)
  with ESMTP id 8203634; Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:32:43 -0400
Subject: Re: Pointers in comparison expressions
From: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>
To: mrc.lrn@inwind.it
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
In-Reply-To: <200507121825.45472.mrc.lrn@inwind.it>
References: <200507121825.45472.mrc.lrn@inwind.it>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:32:00 -0000
Message-Id: <1121185961.13154.50.camel@linux-009002219143>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00506.txt.bz2


> I think that even if the use of relational operators other than '==' and '!=' 
> is legal with pointers, the compiler should issue a warning (when the option 
> -Wall is used), as it does for assignment, used as truth values, not 
> surrounded with parentheses.

Why?
It's legal, it's useful, and used.

--Dan