because this type of expression is ambiguous and in many case

送交者: steven 于 2009-03-14, 04:11:23:

回答: 看不懂你想说明什么由 bu3bu4 于 2009-03-14, 02:40:34:

depends on the compiler implementation. This is very bad and shall be avoided. Since the result may change from one version to another version of the compilers.

所有跟贴:

are you sure it's implementation dependent? - eng (82 bytes) 2009-03-14, 09:55:58 (306420)
- not the operator precedence, the order of expressions being evaluated - steven (60 bytes) 2009-03-14, 11:58:45 (306470)
  - are you sure? += is not treated the same way as = as far as I can see (无内容) - eng (0 bytes) 2009-03-14, 13:46:50 (306520)
    - C99 draft (ISO/IEC 9899:TC3), Ch. 6.5.16 Assignment operators - steven (325 bytes) 2009-03-14, 14:20:24 (306539)
      - it got messed up from cut & paste from pdf, but you should get the idea. (无内容) - steven (0 bytes) 2009-03-14, 15:00:42 (306549)
- Then MAster Tan was blameless here - bu3bu4 (28 bytes) 2009-03-14, 10:31:40 (306435)
这个为什么是ambiguous? java 里是不ambiguous的，C 里怎么规定的？ (无内容) - xinku (0 bytes) 2009-03-14, 08:33:30 (306412)
thanks for explaining. i didnt know - bu3bu4 (114 bytes) 2009-03-14, 06:21:06 (306405)
- ok my bad. actually he did it (无内容) - bu3bu4 (0 bytes) 2009-03-14, 06:23:27 (306406)

加跟贴