Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Harald van DÄ³k, post: 3778384"] I missed something here, sorry. The first comma above is not the comma operator. The second comma is. There is a sequence point after the evaluation of "0" and "10" in "int x=0, y=10", but I believe there is no requirement that "0" is evaluated before "10". In other words, int a=1; int b=++a, c=++a; must set b and c to 2 and 3, or to 3 and 2, and there is no requirement that the implementation is consistent in how it chooses. Corrections welcome, because it's very well possible I'm overlooking something here. [/QUOTE]