https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely ---
Undefined behaviour does not mean you get a compiler error.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
Marek Polacek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #5 from Richard Riley ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #4)
> http://c-faq.com/expr/seqpoints.html
If that is the case, shouldn't a[i] = i++ and such statements be flagged as a
compiler error?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Wakely ---
http://c-faq.com/expr/seqpoints.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Richard Riley from comment #2)
> "When postfix ++ is applied to an lvalue the result is the value of the
> object referred to by the lvalue. After the result is noted, the object is
> incremente
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
--- Comment #2 from Richard Riley ---
"When postfix ++ is applied to an lvalue the result is the value of the object
referred to by the lvalue. After the result is noted, the object is
incremented in the same manner as for the prefix ++ operator
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61317
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
