#define MAX(x,y)(x)>(y)?(x):(y)
main()
{
int i=10,j=5,k=0;
k==MAX(i++,++j);
printf("%d %d %d",i,j,k);//11 7 0
}
Why the output is 11 7 0 instead of 11 6 0?
The statement expands to
k==(i++)>(++j)?(i++):(++j)
Let's re-write this with some added parens to emphasise how the expression is parsed when accounting for precedence rules:
( k == ( (i++) > (++j) ) ) ? (i++) : (++j)
Note that > has higher precedence than ==.
Now, (i++) > (++j) is evaluated first, it evaluates to 1 and both i and j are incremented. Then k is compared for equality with 1 and that yields 0. The conditional operator thus evaluates to (++j) and so j is incremented one more time.
In total i is incremented once, j is incremented twice and k is not modified. And hence the output is as you describe.
This is a good example of the perils of using macros. A function is really what you need.
Some other points:
Your main is declared incorrectly. It should be int main(void).
If you compile with warnings enabled the compiler will flag the line in question. My compiler says:
C:\Users\blah\Desktop>gcc main.c -Wall -o main.exe
main.c: In function 'main':
main.c:2:20: warning: suggest parentheses around comparison in operand of '==' [-Wparentheses]
#define MAX(x,y)(x)>(y)?(x):(y)
^
main.c:6:8: note: in expansion of macro 'MAX'
k==MAX(i++,++j);
^
The macro is replaced by the ternary operator by the preprocessor:
k == (x) > (y) ? (x) : (y)
The comparison: (x)>(y) will be done first and will yield 1, but then the rest of the ternary operator will not be evaluated just yet, because operator == has precedence. The code is equivalent to:
( k == ( (x) > (y) ) ) ? (x) : (y)
We have to compare that result (which was 1) to k: k==(x)>(y), which will yield the result 0. Then only the third operator of the ternary operator will be evaluated: (y).
All in all, i will be evaluated once, and j twice. So the final result is 11 for i and 7 for j. (Variable k will stay 0 as it was never assigned a value.)
Expand the macro with real expression:
k == (i++) > (++j) ? (i++) : (++j);
expr1 ? expr2 : expr3;
This is a typical conditional expression.
expr1 is k == (i++) > (++j). This actually contains two logic operations here. Because == has lower precedence than >, then this logic (i++) > (++j) is evaluated first, and ++j is done BEFORE the first logic test. j now is 6, and we have 10 > 6 which is true (1). Now come to the second logic k == 1 which evaluated to false (0).
Because expr1 is false, expr3 is evaluated, ie (++j) and again the ++ post-fix means that j is incremented BEFORE the evaluation. j now becomes 7.
Macros are where you need to be careful when defining them, they do not necessarily expand the way you expect them to. A key feature of macros in C is that they literally carry out substitution, term for term.
This concept is well explained in the K&R book, as well as in multiple tutorials online, just google it.
Related
#include <stdio.h>
#define max(x,y)(x)>(y)?x:y
int main() {
int i = 10;
int j = 5;
int k = 0;
k == max(i++, ++j);
printf("%d%d%d ", i, j, k);
return 0;
}
I know the answer. It is 11 7 0 but how? please help me with the execution of the ternary operator.
The statement
k==max(i++,++j);
is expanded to
k==(i++)>(j++)?i++:j++;
Note that == has higher precedence than ?: operator and therefore the above expression is equivalent to
( k == ((i++)>(j++)) )?i++:j++;
Since (i++)>(j++) will be true, therefore k == ((i++)>(j++)) is evaluated as false and hence j++ (and it's value become 7) will be evaluated (i++ will be skipped).
NOTE: The above expression does not invoke undefined behavior because there exists sequence point between the evaluation of the first operand of the ternary operator and the second or third operand. For example, the expression
a = (*p++) ? (*p++) : 0
has well defined behavior.
This question is definitely a trick question that will catch many unsuspecting C programmers. The different responders here have more than 100 years of compounded experience in C, yet it took several tries to get this right:
The expression k == max(i++, ++j); expands to:
k == (i++)>(++j)?i++:++j;
Which is parsed as this (== has lower precedence than >, but higher precedence than ?):
(k == ((i++) > (++j)))
? i++
: ++j;
The ternary operator evaluates the test (i++)>(++j), which is true for the values in the program, hence evaluates to 1, different from the value of k, so it proceeds to evaluate the third expression j++, which increments j a second time and returns the intermediary value 6. There is a sequence point between the test and the branch that is executed, so it is OK to increment j twice. The second branch is not executed at all since the test evaluated to false.
i is incremented once, its value becomes 11.
j is incremented twice, its value is 7.
k is not modified by the above statement, because == is the comparison operator, not the assignment operator.
Hence the output is 11 7 0
Notes:
The program uses a macro max that evaluates its arguments more than once and they are not properly parenthesized in the expansion: 2 errors that illustrate the shortcomings of macros. This macro should be names MAX to emphasize the fact that its arguments should not have side effects and its expansion should be fully parenthesized this way:
#define MAX(x,y) ((x) > (y) ? (x) : (y))
A better alternative is to make it an inline function:
static inline int max(int x, int y) {
return x > y ? x : y;
}
If the program had this statement:
k = max(i++, ++j);
The output would be 12 6 11 because unlike ==, = has lower precedence than ? so the statement would expand to:
k = ((i++) > (++j))
? i++
: ++j;
You can study the table of operator precedence for C. There are in my humble opinion too many levels and it is very difficult to memorize all of them, especially since some of them are rather counter-intuitive: print a copy and keep it handy or make a bookmark. When in doubt, use parentheses.
You're using a double equal sign, which is a comparison. k==max(i++,++j); compares the return value of max to k, which is 0.
Instead, try changing the == to =.
I came across this question.
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int k=8;
int x=0==1||k++;
printf("%d %d",x,k);
return 0;
}
The output is 1 9.
As this answer suggests that
Unlike the bitwise | operator, the || operator guarantees left-to-right evaluation; there is a sequence point after the evaluation of the first operand. If the first operand compares unequal to 0, the second operand is not evaluated.
I am unable to understand how the statement int x=0==1||k++ is evaluated,due to which the value of x and k becomes 1,9 respectively.
Can someone explain how such statements are evaluated by the compiler in c ?
"Unlike the bitwise | operator, the || operator guarantees left-to-right evaluation; there is a sequence point after the evaluation of the first operand. If the first operand compares unequal to 0, the second operand is not evaluated."
yes it's true ...
to make it clear first make sure that you are aware of these basics
1) (1 || any_var) is 1
2) Operator precedence is as follows
++
then
==
then
||
NOW coming to your doubt of || vs |
note that | (single pipe) operator ..,will execute both LHS and RHS , no matter what)
whereas
|| (double pipe) evaluates LHS of || first and if it is 1 it need not evaluate RHS (for speed)
RHS of || operator will not be evaluted if LHS comes out to be true.
but here 0==1 is false i.e 0==1 returns 0
hence RHS will be evalauted
so the statement
k++ is executed
but 8 is used (as property of post increment operator says--> first use then increment)
so 0||8 is definitely true (1) so x evaluates to 1
and then k is incremented after sequence point ie k is made equal to 9
hence output x=1 and k=9
I hope it clears your doubt :)
The Operator || (OR) evaluates to true in the cases:
ex: A || B
A is true,
B is true,
Both are true
Because this operation uses Short-Circuit Evaluation if A is evaluated to true, it means that the statement is true already and it won't evaluate B.
In your case 0==1 (0 equals 1) is clearly false, so it will evaluate k++. k++ is a tricky one (in my opinion). In the world of C true/false evaluation is based on being 0 or not (except for the times false means less than 0...) but in true/false evaluation 0 is false, everything else is true.
K++ means evaluate K then increment, so, if K is 0 it will be false and become 1, if it is anything else, it will be true and then increment.
In your case k == 8 so the result of k++ is TRUE and k will become 9. K being true means x evaluation resulted in TRUE (it was FALSE OR TRUE).
So the output is 1(True) 9(8++)
x is 1 because the expression: 0==1||k++ turns out to be true (which is 1 in C land). Why you ask? There are two sequence points here: 0 == 1 and k++. Since the first sequence point evaluates to false (0 in C land), the second sequence point is evaluated (because the short circuit operator is ||). The second sequence returns true (or 1). So, you the entire expression breaks down to: 0 || 1. Hence x is 1.
k is 9 because of k++;
HTH.
I have the following code which produces unexpected results to me:
#include < stdio.h >
int a = 0, value;
int main(void)
{
// Testing the evaluation order of multiple
// conditional operators:
value = (a == 3) ? 3 : (a = 3) ? 5 : 0;
printf("%d\n", value);
return 0;
}
I was expecting for this code to print 3, seeing that the conditional operator evaluates
from right to left and that there is a sequence point at the ? of the first-to-be executed
operation, whereas it actually prints 5.
Is it wrong to assume that side effects of an expression residing between two sequence
points also get calculated when the values of the expressions are?
If i add printf("%d\n" a); i get 3 printed though, so the side effect gets done.
Or is it just that control dosent really pass to the subexpression the value of which
is being calculated "first" officially?
I would rather bet on the latter because changing the value of 'a' to 3 and the rvalue
in the assignment of the second conditional to 4 resulted in short-circuit evaluation
of the first conditional expression, meaning that i got 3 printed for both 'a' and 'value'.
I got the above result on Lubuntu 14.04 with GCC 4.8.2 using the -std=c99 flag.
Thank you for anyone clearing me up on this matter!
The conditional operator does not "evaluate right to left". The standard (C11 6.5.15/4) says:
The first operand is evaluated; there is a sequence point between its
evaluation and the evaluation of the second or third operand
(whichever is evaluated). The second operand is evaluated only if the
first compares unequal to 0; the third operand is evaluated only if the
first compares equal to 0; the result is the value of the second or
third operand (whichever is evaluated)
So the expression (a == 3) ? 3 : (a = 3) ? 5 : 0; evaluates in these steps:
(a == 3) result is 0
(a = 3) result is 3, unequal to 0
5
So 5 is what is assigned to value.
You might be confusing the concept of how the conditional operator is evaluated with how the conditional operator associates (or groups). The syntax of C specifies that the expression:
(a == 3) ? 3 : (a = 3) ? 5 : 0;
associates or groups sub expressions like so:
((a == 3) ? 3 : ((a = 3) ? 5 : 0));
which is often described as 'associates right'. However, this grouping/associativity doesn't affect the fact that the expression is still evaluated left-to-right and that the second conditional expression only evaluates after the first operand in the 'outer' conditional expression is evaluated.
Let's trace through this one part at a time. You have this expression:
value = (a == 3) ? 3 : (a = 3) ? 5 : 0;
Since a starts off at 0, we skip the 3 branch of the first ?: and look at the second branch, which is
(a = 3) ? 5 : 0
The condition here is a = 3, which sets a to 3 and then evaluates to the new value of a, which is 3. Since 3 is nonzero, we take the first branch of the ?:, so the expression evaluates to 5. The net effect is that a is set to 3 and value is set to 5.
The language spec guarantees that the evaluation order is indeed what you think it should be - the "if" and "else" branches of the ?: operator are guaranteed not to execute unless the condition works out as it does, so there are sequence points here. I think you just misunderstood the effect of the a = 3 operation.
Hope this helps!
The conditional operator evaluates left-to-right (evaluating the condition before either of the branches). You may be confusing this with its right-associativity (in which it appears to bind right-to-left).
Your conditional expression essentially results in the following logic:
if(a == 3) {
value = 3;
} else {
if(a = 3) {
value = 5;
} else {
value = 0;
}
}
Note that the conditional doesn't execute a branch until after the condition is evaluated.
The following code snippet:
int i=-3,j=2,k=0,m;
m=++i && ++j || ++k;
can be evaluated using two concepts,I believe:
1.Since ++ operator has greater precedence than the logical operators,so first all increment operators will be evaluted,then && having higher precedence than || will be computed.In this process,k will be incremented.
2.First && operator will be evaluated.For this ++ i and ++j will be computed.Since the result of the && operator is 1,no need to evaluate the ++k.So k will not be incremented.
When I try it on a system, the result proves reasoning 2 to be correct and 1 to be wrong. Why is it so?
Oli is right... You're confusing precedence with evaluation order.
Precedence means that the expression is interpreted as:
m = ((((++i) && (++j)) || (++k));
As opposed to, say:
m = (++(i && ++(j || (++k)))
Precedence doesn't change the fact that the LHS of the || operator will always be evaluated before the RHS.
In attempting to be efficient, evaluation of an OR statement (executed from left to right) stops when the LHS is true. There is no need to start evaluating the RHS - there is no concept of "precedence" except within the same group of an expression (when it matters to the value of the expression whether you first do A or B. Example: 5 + 3 * 2 should evaluate to 11. But in evaluating ( 5 + 6 > 3 * 2) it doesn't matter whether you do the addition before the multiplication - it doesn't change the result of the comparison. And in practice this gets evaluated left-to-right. Thus you get the result you observed.
See also this earlier answer
The && and || operators force left-to-right evaluation. So i++ is evaluated first. If the result of the expression is not 0, then the expression j++ is evaluated. If the result of i++ && j++ is not 1, then k++ is evaluated.
The && and || operators both introduce sequence points, so the side effects of the ++ operators are applied before the next expression is evaluated. Note that this is not true in general; in most circumstances, the order in which expressions are evaluated and the order in which side effects are applied is unspecified.
Code:
#include<stdio.h>
int main()
{
int j = 7, i = 4;
j = j || ++i && printf("you can");
printf("%d %d",i,j);
return 0;
}
Output:
4 1
[Code Link][1]
The precedence of prefix operator is higher than logical operators.
2.Logical && has higher precedence than logical ||.
In Logical AND(&&) if first operand evaluates to false than second will not be evaluated and In Logical OR(||) if first operand evaluates to true, then second will not be evaluated.
The complete expression is evaluating to true, therefore j is 1 .
Doubts:
Why the first rule is not followed here? Shouldn't it be correct?
j=(j||((++i) &&printf("you can")));
Therefore value of i becomes 5, in the printf statement.
Why are the general precedence rules are violated here? Associativity comes into action when precedence of two operators is same. Shouldn't the compiler first see whether to evaluate || or &&?
If || is evaluated first, which shouldn't be as per my knowledge, then result is correct. However, if it is not evaluated first, then you can51 should be printed.
In this expression:
j = j || ++i && printf("you can");
There's a sequence point after the || and it is evaluated from left to right. Since j is non-zero, the rest of the expression is not evaluated. Hence, j || (....) becomes true which is 1. Since is ++i is not evaluated i remains 4. Hence, the output is 4, 1.
From the C standard:
Annex C
— The end of the first operand of the following operators: logical AND
&& (6.5.13); logical OR || (6.5.14); conditional ? (6.5.15); comma ,
(6.5.17).
If you j was zero then ++i && printf("you can") would have been evaluated and i would become 5 and you can will also be printed. You are correct about the precedence of ++ being greater than ||, but since there's a sequence point, j|| is evalauted first.
j || ++i && printf("you can") evaluates to true, which is represented by 1. Because it is an OR, and because j is non-zero, only the left hand of the OR is evaluated, so the ++i and the printf aren't evaluated. Thus j is 1 and i stays at 4.
Of course, real code should never every do anything like that. You should always write code in ways that the order of operations is obvious, and you should almost never have code with side effects in OR statements.
What you have here:
j = j || ++i && printf("you can");
Is a logic expression (there's no math happening). Let's break it down:
++i // as a mathematical expression this is i=i+1 (5 in your case)
printf("you can"); // printf returns the number of chars written, (7)
So you'd expect this to be:
j = 7 || 5 && 7;
The output of the above expression is simply 1. So even if this executed you should see j=1. So why don't you see the printf() output?
The reason to that is that whole expression didn't run. It doesn't have to. Consider:
result = TRUE || (anything else);
Anything that's "true" or'd with anything else will always return true. The compiler knows this and once it sees 7 || it equates that to true || and says "I know enough, set j to true and move on".
This is why the expression doesn't increment i and why it doesn't print "you can".
Now if you were to flip the expression:
j = ++i && printf("you can") || j;
The logic stays the same but the compiler doesn't see the || until it's evaluated everything else, so i will be incremented and the printf will be displayed.
I ran this program two ways:
j = j || ++i && printf("you can");
then, like this:
j = j || (++i && printf("you can"));
The output for both was 4 1. Before I ran them, I expected to get the exact same result from both due to the left to right associativity of logical or. The entire expression is gonna be evaluated from left to right regardless. The role of the parentheses is to ensure that an expression is evaluated as one expression, and doesn't necessarily mean that it will be the first expression to be evaluated. If you want more evidence of this, try something simple:
j = 1 || (++i);
Even though (++i) is in parenthesis, it is never evaluated. Again, because of left to right associativity.