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