On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 01:10:11 +0530, Dinesh Joshi
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 13:28 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 00:35:05 +0530, Dinesh Joshi
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Fix your client for the last time or stop quoting me!
If you would point out what exactly is broken, I would be
happy to oblige. Seems like my MUA is correctly generating the
attribution.
>> If you think that "i++ + ++i" is a legal construct in standards
>> conformant C, then people should stay away from wherever you
>> learned the language.
> Do you have the habit of not reading other peoples' posts completely
> and taking their statements out of context, twisting them?
> Behold what I had written...
>> Yes, its undefined behavior.
yes, after going on and on about how it showed how operators
worked, and how it was used to show students what is possible in
C. It is, in fact, not possible to do this in C, but in some extended
version loosely related to C implemented by the TC compiler.
manoj
--
Hear about the young Chinese woman who just won the lottery? One
fortunate cookie...
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
http://mm.glug-bom.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
