Bug#278081: gcc-3.3: REGRESSION: Doesn't follow precedence

[Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>]

On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 01:42:02PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
> You can rearrange -X+Y, as well as -X()+Y or -X+Y(), but you cannot do
> this for -X()+Y() unless you can guarantee that X() doesn't depend on
> Y() and vice-versa.

Could you quote standard chapter and verse for this?  I believe you are
incorrect.  While the function calls are sequence points, they are not
defined to happen in any particular order.

>From ISO C 6.5#3:
       [#3]  The grouping of operators and operands is indicated by
       the syntax.  Except as specified later (for the function-
       call  (),  &&,  ||,  ?:,  and comma operators), the order of
       evaluation of subexpressions and the  order  in  which  side
       effects take place are both unspecified.

I don't have ISO C++ handy but I believe it is worded similarly.


-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz