Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes...

On 08/09/2024 17:14, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
 

On 07/09/2024 02:44, Waldek Hebisch wrote:

Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:

On 06/09/2024 11:19, Waldek Hebisch wrote:

Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:

>

(You can balance it out by by requiring ASSIGN(&A, &B)!)

This would not work in general, as I wrote it, the following are
valid:
assign(&a, 42)
assign(&a, a + 1)
but the second argument has no address, so your variant would not
work.

>
I believe that C's compound literals can give a reference to a+1:

 Is there no part of C you can't misrepresent?

Is nothing I write that you will take issue with?

 

   #include <stdio.h>
>
   void assign(int* lhs, int* rhs) {
       *lhs = *rhs;
   }
>
   int main(void) {
       int a=20;
>
       assign(&a, &(int){a+1});

 This is simply an anonymous object.  You could have used a named object
and it wold not have been any further from being a "reference to a+1".

I suggested a 'assign()' function could have balanced parameters by requiring:
     asssign(&A, &B);
Someone objects that you can't in general apply & to arbitrary, unnamed, transient, intermediate values such as 'a + 1'.
I showed how you could do that using anonymous compound literals which avoids having to create an explicit named temporary which in standard C would need to be outside of that assignment call.
But you apparently have a problem it.
Or more likely you have a problem with me.