Re: Question about ECPGset_noind_null() and ECPGis_noind_null()

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
>> Is it *really* a bug? I recalled a comment from my C teacher
>> in '92 or '93 about this exact issue, that the prefix/postfix
>> increment/decrement operators are executed in the
>> statement in an implementation-defined order,

> Not if they come after a short-circuit operator such as && - after all,
> that's what short-circuit evaluation implies. If the left hand operand
> of && is false the right hand should not be evaluated at all.

Yes. && is a sequence point and the compiler is not allowed to move
side-effects across a sequence point. What your C teacher was warning
you against was things like
a[i] = i++;
'=' is not a sequence point so it's undefined which array index
will be stored into.

regards, tom lane