Order of evaluation of post-increment operator
John Colvin via Digitalmars-d-learn
digitalmars-d-learn at puremagic.com
Sun Dec 28 11:49:24 PST 2014
On Sunday, 28 December 2014 at 17:34:52 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
> On Sunday, 28 December 2014 at 16:05:32 UTC, bearophile wrote:
>> (IMHO it must be).
>
> Disallowing is an alternative to consider. Even defined
> behaviour can be unintuitive and error prone.
I guess there are cases where it's not easily catchable:
void foo(int* p0, int* p1)
{
(*p0)++ = (*p1)++;
}
what happens when p0 == p1?
More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn
mailing list