Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!homxb!mtuxo!mtune!codas!cpsc6a!rtech!wrs!dg
From: dg@wrs.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Style [++i vs i++]
Message-ID: <223@wrs.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Jul-87 14:20:51 EDT
Article-I.D.: wrs.223
Posted: Tue Jul  7 14:20:51 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Jul-87 11:19:06 EDT
References: <17310@amdcad.AMD.COM> <2159@emory.uucp> <43@ghsvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: dg@wrs.UUCP (David Goodenough)
Organization: Wind River Systems, Emeryville, CA
Lines: 20

In article <43@ghsvax.UUCP> edk@ghsvax.UUCP (Ed Kaulakis) writes:
>
>	Many compilers will materialize the (returned old value) of i++ even 
>when nobody wants it, but will do better with ++i.

Ye gads! what braindamaged piece of software are you using?? - I've worked
with more compilers than I can name, and even my old faithful vintage 1979
copy of BDS C for the good old Intel 8080 doesn't F*** up when doing a i++
as opposed to a ++i. (I don't know about 8086 compilers, I haven't had the
misfortune to have been forced to work on a mess dos machine :-}).
P.S. These flames are _NOT_ aimed at Ed Kaulakis - he gets my deepest
condolences for haveing to use poorly written software, - my blowtorch is
pointed at whoever wrote the compiler(s) in question.
--
		dg@wrs.UUCP - David Goodenough

					+---+
					| +-+-+
					+-+-+ |
					  +---+