Is this a gcc bug?

[Joe Buck]

> 
> > How about something like:
> >         warning: 'x' may have unexpected value because of side-effects
> > or
> >         warning: side-effects make value of 'x' undefined
> > or
> >         warning: undefined order of side-effects on 'x'
> > One might replace "side-effects" by "updates" or "changes to".
> 
> How about, multiple side-effects on 'x' between sequence points?

"sequence points" is standardese and doesn't mean anything to most users.
Even "side-effects" may be surprising -- I don't think a user thinks
of the increment of x in x++ as a "side effect".

How about:

warning: the order of the modifications to 'x' is undefined