Fun surprising things

[Brad Roberts]

On 10/31/2018 10:57 PM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 31, 2018 10:58:55 PM MDT Neia Neutuladh via
> Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> Except that's only applicable if the spec doesn't define the appropriate
>> order of evaluation.
> The spec defines left-to-right evaluation, but since _most_ programming
> languages don't define the order of evaluation so that the compiler can
> efficiently reorder operations, I'd honestly argue that it's just plain bad
> practice in general to rely on the order of evaluation of expressions like
> this. It's the sort of thing that's just begging for trouble. Sure, if D
> defines it, plays by its own rules properly, you understand its rules
> properly, and you write your code accordingly, you can theoretically avoid
> problems, but if you get in the habit of writing such code, you're just
> begging to shoot yourself in the foot as soon as you have to write code in
> any other language. And even within D, if the expression is complicated, the
> exact order of operations can get hard to understand. So, writing anything
> that's even vaguely like foo() + bar() where foo() or bar() depend on one
> another at all is just asking for it. It's a code smell, and it should be
> avoided.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

That's a not unreasonable argument for not specifying the order of 
evaluation.  But that's irrelevant since D has defined the order so not 
following it is a bug that must be fixed.