This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c/6409] C comma operator: wrong behavior
- From: "suan at cs dot wisc dot edu" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 21 Apr 2005 02:34:30 -0000
- Subject: [Bug c/6409] C comma operator: wrong behavior
- References: <20020422100601.6409.suan@cs.wisc.edu>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From suan at cs dot wisc dot edu 2005-04-21 02:34 -------
Hmm... now that I've been reminded of this bug, I might as well try to revive it.
I think my question has more to do with the granularity of well-defined-ness.
Consider the expression A + (B,C), which contains a subexpression (B,C) which is
itself an expression. If the expression (B,C) does not contain conflicts,
should not its behavior be well-defined? Should not the A-B/A-C conflict in the
outer expression mean only that the outer expression's behavior be undefined,
and not affect the well-defined-ness of the inner expression?
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|DUPLICATE |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6409