On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 04:04:57PM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: > Hm. Well i agree that precedence rules which loose a construct > completely (in that =5 is lost in I=5?I:J) is weird, but other
What's that even supposed to *be*? You're assigning I=5 and then checking whether the assignment actually worked? If you intended it to be i==5 ? i : j then you really ought to put some parentheses in it, so people like me who haven't memorized the C precedence rules for decades won't have to dig up a manual to figure out whether it's (i==5) ? i : j or i == (5 ? i : j).
