> My compiler will vigorously refuse to compile such nonsense - there > will be no flags to change this > behavior.[ Forgot to Reply-All first time, sorry. ] But how would it deal with: *p + *q++; It can't know in general whether *p and *q denote the same object.
> [ Forgot to Reply-All first time, sorry. ] > > But how would it deal with: > > *p + *q++; > > It can't know in general whether *p and *q denote the same object.Shouldn't that be *p + (*q)++ ? -- Paul Curtis, Rowley Associates Ltd http://www.rowley.co.uk
On 20 Apr 2011, at 11:00, Paul Curtis wrote:>> [ Forgot to Reply-All first time, sorry. ] >> >> But how would it deal with: >> >> *p + *q++; >> >> It can't know in general whether *p and *q denote the same object. > > Shouldn't that be *p + (*q)++ ?Yes, sorry.