Case Range Statement ..

["Jérôme M. Berger"]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Jérôme M. Berger wrote:
>>     I've always felt they were useless and confusing. What's the 
>> advantage of "y = (foo(), x + 3);" over "foo(); y = x+3;"?
> 
> When you only see the x+3 because you're recursively walking the tree 
> generating code.
> 
>>> It's handy for things like rewriting ++e so it can be used more than 
>>> once but is only evaluated once:
>>>
>>>    (tmp = ++e, tmp)
>>
>>     Uh? How is that different from "++e"
> 
> You can then use tmp more than once with only one increment of e.

	I guess I'll need a complete concrete example before I understand. 
I mean:

tmp = ++e;
veryComplexExpressionThatUsesTmpSeveralTimesWithoutTouchingE;

Or even:

++e;
veryComplexExpressionThatUsesESeveralTimesWithoutIncrementingIt;

	Are both clearer, less error-prone and should produce equivalent 
code to the coma expression.

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger at free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger at jabber.fr

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20090710/ac95b6d9/attachment.pgp>