'goto" gone from computer languages or is it!

[der Mouse]

>>  a[++i] = ++i;
> I assume that the above statement could have two possible
> interpretations:
> (a)  j = ++i;  k = ++i;  a[j] = k;
> (b)  j = ++i;  k = ++i;  a[k] = j;

True; those are two of the many possibilities.

> (i)  Are there any other interpretations?

Yes.

> If so, what is the equivalent code?

There may not be any.  When code wanders into realms specified to
produce undefined behaviour (as here, where i is modified twice without
an intervening sequence point), there is nothing compelling the
compiler to produce output that corresponds to any well-formed C code
at all.  (I'm not even sure there's anything in the C spec calling for
the compiler to produce *any* output in such circumstances.)

If you want possible interpretations that *do* correspond to writable C
code, here's one for you:

	a[i*i]=314156; i=a[0]/a[-1];

(Of course, a real compiler would be unlikely to do that....)

> (ii) Does gcc 3.3 produce a warning or an error message?

I don't know (and mostly don't care).

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B