Since when do compilers as a rule obey the standard? I'm not bashing gcc (though I *am*
bashing Micro$oft and most others) because gcc's problems are due to its nature as open
software (i.e., no one's paying the developers, so they have to do it when they have
time). Relying on standards having been followed with an open software product is
foolish, and doing so with a closed software product is inane.
>On Wed, 3 May 2000, Cesar Eduardo Barros wrote:
>
>> while ((mm->swap_cnt << 2 * (i + 1) < max_cnt) && i++ < 10)
>> /* nothing */;
>>
>> I'm not that good at C, mas aren't expressions with side-effects
>> ill-defined? How can we be sure (short of tracking the gcc
>> mailing lists) that i will be incremented after the left part of
>> the test?
>
>Because it is defined in the C standard?
>
>Rik
>--
>The Internet is not a network of computers. It is a network
>of people. That is its real strength.
>
>Wanna talk about the kernel? irc.openprojects.net / #kernelnewbies
>http://www.conectiva.com/ http://www.surriel.com/
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 07 2000 - 21:00:13 EST