On 30 January 2015 at 16:58, James Dennett wrote: > It's hardly just a loophole: C++ doesn't specify the order of evaluation, > so the code is wrong (i.e., non-portable, as you've found). > > Arguably this is a design problem with IOStreams, given how > tempting it can be to write code that assumes left-to-right evaluation, > but it's not a compiler bug.
Okay, but what is the reason for changing the "expected" (left-to-right) order of evaluation? Is there an optimisation benefit? If not, why change the order to something unexpected?
