Re: Regarding assignment to struct

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
[...]

And sometimes, excessive use of the comma operator causes
compiler failures.
>
cfront generated the comma operator extensively, and expression trees
would grow to very large sizes.   There was a bug in PCC (for the
88100) where it would run out of temporary registers while generating
code for some cfront generated comma expressions (which were -far- from
human readable).    I had to fix the temporary register allocation
code in PCC to spill registers when the sethi-ullman number for an
expression exceeded the number of registers.
 
That was circa 1990, and I've generally not found any arguments
favoring their general use persuasive in the years since, including
Andrey's and Kaz's responses recently posted here.

So a compiler you used circa 1990 had problems with comma expressions.

That's hardly an argument against using comma operators today.

The simple fact that experienced programmers that read this usenet
newsgroup missed the comma operators in the original example speaks
volumes.

*That's* a valid argument.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */