Alain D D Williams wrote in <20221229204511.gc16...@phcomp.co.uk>: ... |No. i += j += i += i does not contain a sequence point so there is \ |no guarantee |that anything is completed (eg storing a value in variable i) before \ |another |part (getting a value from variable i) is evaluated.
But then shell "operators and their precedence, associativity, and values are the same as in the C language". There are no sequence points. += is right associative, and then unwound. (For C, they do it all right, only clang warns on sequencing when tested. But yes, i do "hate" ISO/IEC JTC1/SC22/WG14, N925, "A formal model of sequence points and related issues", Clive Feather, from Y2K (my version), and if only for such cases like the above. Or the x=++x shown in the committee document (for exactly that reason i presume: an "easy" formal formula to make it work, even if human logic gives you the green light).) --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt)
