Question for ISO C standards gurus

[Diego Novillo]

On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 20:25, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:

> I can't see any reason why that would print 5.  Based on the above, p
> should be incremented before the function call to foo().  But that
> doesn't change the value of *p++, which means "get the value at *p,
> then increment p".  The above just means that this should not happen:
>     t1 = *p;
>     foo (t1);
>     p = p + 1;
>
Thanks.  Now I know what the bug is, then.


Diego.