From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: patch: garbage error strings in libpq |
Date: | 2005-07-06 09:39:19 |
Message-ID: | 42CBA6C7.9040001@samurai.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl wrote:
> Does anyone know what the situation is in C89, or whatever the applicable
> standard is?
[ *looks* ]
The text is the same in both versions:
http://dev.unicals.com/papers/c89-draft.html#3.3.2.2
"The order of evaluation of the function designator, the arguments, and
subexpressions within the arguments is unspecified, but there is a
sequence point before the actual call."
(On reading this more closely, I suppose you could make the argument
that a function call that takes place in the argument list of another
function call is a "subexpression within the [outer function's]
arguments", so the order of evaluation prior to the call of the outer
function would be undefined. But I don't think that's the right reading
of the standard.)
-Neil
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Page | 2005-07-06 10:07:01 | Re: [HACKERS] Dbsize backend integration |
Previous Message | jtv | 2005-07-06 09:13:14 | Re: patch: garbage error strings in libpq |