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]