This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug c++/64870] value not set via reference


https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64870

--- Comment #3 from Marc Glisse <glisse at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Conrad from comment #2)
> Notwithstanding loopholes in C++ legalese,

No loopholes, this was a deliberate choice in C.

> the expected result is to
> evaluate things left to right, just like reading words and sentences.

Except when there is an = sign, where you expect the right hand side to be
evaluated before the left? And maybe a few other cases?

> clang produces the least surprising result.  With gcc we end up with "wtf?"

C/C++ programmers learn about that soon enough.

> What is the benefit in changing the expected order of evaluation?

Performance.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]