Hi,
From man pages in unix it seem the behavior in below usage of
printf() is undefined. But, is there something to be noted from the
output of the below line.
printf("%d %d", i = printf("order of printing"),j = printf("Test"));
Output:
Testorder of printing174,
greenhorn 7 1382
"Greenhorn" <te************@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11**********************@o13g2000cwo.googlegr oups.com... From man pages in unix it seem the behavior in below usage of printf() is undefined. But, is there something to be noted from the output of the below line.
printf("%d %d", i = printf("order of printing"),j = printf("Test"));
Yes, you may deduce the behaviour of your implementation in these
circumstances. The behaviour may be different for other implementations
and/or in other circumstances.
Alex
In article <11**********************@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups .com>,
Greenhorn <te************@yahoo.com> wrote:
: From man pages in unix it seem the behavior in below usage of
:printf() is undefined.
That depends on what you mean by 'undefined'. The order of processing
parameters for a function call is not mandated by the standard, but
it is mandated that the parameters be processed "as if by
assignment" before the routine itself is invoked.
The behaviour is thus just the usual behaviour in the presence of
side-effects: they can occur in any order, and in some instances
may occur varying numbers of times.
:But, is there something to be noted from the
:output of the below line.
: printf("%d %d", i = printf("order of printing"),j = printf("Test"));
:Output:
:Testorder of printing174,
Yes, one can learn that something is broken:
- The printf format has a space between the two %d's, but the output
shown does not
- There is no comma in the output formats, but there is one in
the output shown; it should not have occured
Other than that, one could tentative figure that the in the absence
of optimization reasons otherwise, parameters are probably processed
from right to left. There is correlation with right to left processing
and implimentations that push each parameter value onto a stack
before making the call -- as contrasted with implimentations that
allocate an amount of storage large enough to hold all the parameters
(their types are all known, so the total storage can be computed)
and then store the parameters at offsets from the beginning of the
block (which tend to use left-to-right calling so as to write the
parameter values into increasing storage with incrementing stack pointer.)
Push-onto-the stack implimentations are also correlated to
ABIs in which the stack grows upwards rather than downwards.
But all of these are tentative and usually of interest only when doing
implimentation-dependant (non-portable) interfacing with non-C routines.
Though one might want to know the direction the stack grows in order
to know whether the overall program memory layout is suitable...
which would depend upon the ABI.
--
Positrons can be described as electrons traveling backwards in time.
Certainly many Usenet arguments about the past become clearer when they
are re-interpreted as uncertainty about the future.
-- Walter Roberson
Greenhorn wrote: Hi, From man pages in unix it seem the behavior in below usage of printf() is undefined.
The man page is, in this instance, entirely correct as far as the C
standard is concerned. So don't do it.
But, is there something to be noted from the output of the below line.
printf("%d %d", i = printf("order of printing"),j = printf("Test"));
Output: Testorder of printing174,
Well, if you ran it on a Quarckle Froozit using it's native compiler
that information would tell you that it was exactly 4:52:13 on the 1st
July 79 BC, since that is the only time when it ever produces that
result (setting the clock on the machine is not sufficient, it actually
has to be that date/time in reality). Of course, the Quarckle Froozit
did not exist then, so this is entirely academic.
--
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.
Flash Gordon wrote: Greenhorn wrote: Hi, From man pages in unix it seem the behavior in below usage of printf() is undefined.
The man page is, in this instance, entirely correct as far as the C standard is concerned. So don't do it.
> But, is there something to be noted from the output of the below line.
printf("%d %d", i = printf("order of printing"),j =
printf("Test"));
Actually, the behaviour is unspecified.
Assuming that printf succeeds, stdout must have received either:
Testorder of printing17 4
or
order of printingTest17 4
Flash Gordon wrote: Greenhorn wrote: Hi, From man pages in unix it seem the behavior in below usage of printf() is undefined.
The man page is, in this instance, entirely correct as far as the C standard is concerned. So don't do it.
> But, is there something to be noted from the output of the below line.
printf("%d %d", i = printf("order of printing"),j = printf("Test"));
Output: Testorder of printing174,
Well, if you ran it on a Quarckle Froozit using it's native compiler that information would tell you that it was exactly 4:52:13 on the 1st July 79 BC, since that is the only time when it ever produces that result (setting the clock on the machine is not sufficient, it actually has to be that date/time in reality). Of course, the Quarckle Froozit did not exist then, so this is entirely academic.
I'm not seeing it as undefined.
The order in which function arguments are evaluated is unspecified.
--
pete
pete wrote: Flash Gordon wrote:
Greenhorn wrote:
Hi, From man pages in unix it seem the behavior in below usage of printf() is undefined.
The man page is, in this instance, entirely correct as far as the C standard is concerned. So don't do it.
> But, is there something to be noted from the
output of the below line.
printf("%d %d", i = printf("order of printing"),j = printf("Test"));
Output: Testorder of printing174,
Well, if you ran it on a Quarckle Froozit using it's native compiler that information would tell you that it was exactly 4:52:13 on the 1st July 79 BC, since that is the only time when it ever produces that result (setting the clock on the machine is not sufficient, it actually has to be that date/time in reality). Of course, the Quarckle Froozit did not exist then, so this is entirely academic.
I'm not seeing it as undefined. The order in which function arguments are evaluated is unspecified.
OK, I was wrong about undefined. However, Is it mandated that it always
evaluates them in the same order? Also, is it mandated that it does not
evaluate them in parallel (something that could, in theory, be done on
dual processor PCs)?
If the order does not always have to be the same what I said could still
be true ;-)
I still stand by don't do it.
--
Flash Gordon
Living in interesting times.
Although my email address says spam, it is real and I read it.
Flash Gordon wrote: pete wrote: Flash Gordon wrote:
Greenhorn wrote:
Hi, From man pages in unix it seem the behavior in below usage of printf() is undefined.
The man page is, in this instance, entirely correct as far as the C standard is concerned. So don't do it.
> But, is there something to be noted from the
output of the below line.
printf("%d %d", i = printf("order of printing"),j = printf("Test"));
Output: Testorder of printing174,
Well, if you ran it on a Quarckle Froozit using it's native compiler that information would tell you that it was exactly 4:52:13 on the 1st July 79 BC, since that is the only time when it ever produces that result (setting the clock on the machine is not sufficient, it actually has to be that date/time in reality). Of course, the Quarckle Froozit did not exist then, so this is entirely academic. I'm not seeing it as undefined. The order in which function arguments are evaluated is unspecified.
OK, I was wrong about undefined. However, Is it mandated that it always evaluates them in the same order?
No.
Also, is it mandated that it does not evaluate them in parallel (something that could, in theory, be done on dual processor PCs)?
The arguments have function calls.
Function calls are sequence points
and can only take place one at a time.
The subsequent assignments to i and j, can take place in any order.
If the order does not always have to be the same what I said could still be true ;-)
No.
There's a limit to the choices that the computer can make.
Undefined behavior is different.
--
pete This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: Steven Bethard |
last post by:
So I end up writing code like this a fair bit:
map = {}
for key, value in sequence:
map.setdefault(key, ).append(value)
This code basically constructs a one-to-many mapping -- each value that...
|
by: Nick Coghlan |
last post by:
Time for another random syntax idea. . .
So, I was tinkering in the interactive interpreter, and came up with the
following one-size-fits-most default argument hack:
Py> x = 1
Py> def...
|
by: Albert Wagner |
last post by:
What is the evaluation context of the setTimeout args below? I have a
separate Timer instance for each sprite in my program. As coded,
"this.Clock" doesn't work. Thanks ahead for any advice.
...
|
by: Bhushit Joshipura |
last post by:
This post contains one question and one proposal.
A. May I know why order of evaluation of arguments is not specified in
C/C++?
I asked a question in comp.lang.c++ for the following...
|
by: Jan Engelhardt |
last post by:
Hi,
I was told that order of evaluation is unspecified for functions, i.e.
int f = 0;
print_results(modify(&f), modify(&f), modify(&f));
where i.e. modify() increases f by one. In my case...
|
by: Jens.Toerring |
last post by:
Hi,
I have a possibly rather stupid question about the order of evaluation
in a statement like this:
result = foo( x ) - bar( y );
How can I make 100% sure that foo(x) is evaluated before...
|
by: dragoncoder |
last post by:
Consider the following code.
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int i =1;
printf("%d ,%d ,%d\n",i,++i,i++);
return 0;
}
|
by: int main(void) |
last post by:
Hi all,
In the following program,
#include<stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
int x = 10;
int y = 10;
|
by: Peter |
last post by:
I know the order of construction of member and base class objects.
My question is the following:
Is the order of evaluation of argument lists for these constructors
also defined?
E.g. can I...
|
by: Rasjid |
last post by:
Hello,
I have just joined and this is my first post.
I have never been able to resolve the issue of order of evaluation in
C/C++ and the related issue of precedence of operators, use of...
|
by: Charles Arthur |
last post by:
How do i turn on java script on a villaon, callus and itel keypad mobile phone
|
by: ryjfgjl |
last post by:
If we have dozens or hundreds of excel to import into the database, if we use the excel import function provided by database editors such as navicat, it will be extremely tedious and time-consuming...
|
by: nemocccc |
last post by:
hello, everyone, I want to develop a software for my android phone for daily needs, any suggestions?
|
by: Sonnysonu |
last post by:
This is the data of csv file
1 2 3
1 2 3
1 2 3
1 2 3
2 3
2 3
3
the lengths should be different i have to store the data by column-wise with in the specific length.
suppose the i have to...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
There are some requirements for setting up RAID:
1. The motherboard and BIOS support RAID configuration.
2. The motherboard has 2 or more available SATA protocol SSD/HDD slots (including MSATA, M.2...
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However,...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each...
| |