Re: Unexpected behavior of gcc on pointer dereference & increment

[Paul Koning via Gcc]

> On Sep 1, 2023, at 12:35 PM, Tomas Bortoli via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I recently discovered that the following C statement:
> 
> pointer++;
> 
> is semantically equivalent to the following:
> 
> *pointer++;
> 
> Is this due to operators' priority? To me, that looks weird.

Yes, https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/operator_precedence shows that.  
Liberal use of parentheses is a very good practice. 

        paul