Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcnc!ece-csc!ncrcae!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!ucsdhub!jack!man!nu3b2!rwhite
From: rwhite@nu3b2.UUCP (Robert C. White Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Style [++i vs i++]
Message-ID: <795@nu3b2.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 10-Jul-87 21:42:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: nu3b2.795
Posted: Fri Jul 10 21:42:37 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 12-Jul-87 14:18:56 EDT
References: <17310@amdcad.AMD.COM> <2159@emory.uucp> <43@ghsvax.UUCP> <223@wrs.UUCP>
Organization: National University, San Diego
Lines: 24
Summary: What?

In article <223@wrs.UUCP>, dg@wrs.UUCP (David Goodenough) writes:
> 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
> 					  +---+

	Pardon my foolish inquiry... isnt i++ SUPPOSED to return the old
value of i AND THEN increment it's stored value.  Ed, if this isnt what
you mean ignore this and then post an example of the misfunctioning code,
I for one would love to see a murdered code fragment and credits for the
complier. [as a warning against purchase]
If this is what you mean.... well, I don't know what to say :-)


Robert.

Disclaimer:  My mind is so fragmented by random excursions into a
	wilderness of abstractions and incipient ideas that the
	practical purposes of the moment are often submerged in
	my consciousness and I don't know what I'm doing.
		[my employers certainly have no idea]