This question already has answers here:
Why are these constructs using pre and post-increment undefined behavior?
(14 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I felt that such an expression should be invalid but I was able to compile it and got the answer 5.
At the end I felt that even if it does answer should be 4 not 5.
int main(void)
{
int i=1;
// how is the next line evaluated ie in what sequence??
i=2+2*i++;
printf("%d",i);
return 0;
}
The output I got was 5. I can not understand how it should give the value.
This is undefined behaviour, since i is modified more than once between sequence points. For instance, this compiler gives 4 as the answer, because it puts the increment after the assignment. Another reasonable answer is 6, if the increment is before the assignment. But, as you've found, the compiler is permitted to make the answer whatever it wants, including 5.
See here for more about sequence points and undefined behaviour.
Related
This question already has answers here:
issue with assignment operator inside printf()
(3 answers)
How to understand the behaviour of printf statement in C?
(5 answers)
Why are these constructs using pre and post-increment undefined behavior?
(14 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I've been studying C for about a year now, and I came across this above when I was just playing around. I first thought maybe it's a case of assignment precedence (i.e. x=10 happens first), but then I tried
printf("%d %d %d", x==5, x=10, x<6);
and it outputs
0 10 1. Could someone please explain to me why/what is going, as this seems extremely baffling to me and I'm starting to think it's undefined behavior perhaps?
This is indeed undefined behavior. Arguments to functions are evaluated in an unspecified order, so doing anything that relies on that order becomes UB.
It looks like your compiler goes right-to-left (at least in this instance). That's a reasonable way to do it. But since it's UB, don't count on it always doing that.
This question already has answers here:
Why are these constructs using pre and post-increment undefined behavior?
(14 answers)
Undefined behavior and sequence points
(5 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
The following C code executes correctly but not as expected. Post increment operator here in z=z++ is creating confusion here. I may not be able to figure out silly mistake/concept, Can I have a brief explanation or some helpful link please.
#include<stdio.h>
int main()
{
int x=5,y=6,z=7;
if(x-y)
z=z++;
z=--z;
printf("%d",z);
}
You are not allowed to do z=z++; because between 2 sequence points you are not allowed to assign a variable 2 times.
This one is a full expression in which you assign z 2 times. So it can be interpreted ambigously and the result of the C abstract machine is undefined behavior.
The same for z=--z.
This question already has answers here:
Why are these constructs using pre and post-increment undefined behavior?
(14 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
here is very simple c program:
int main()
{
int i = 22;
printf("%d %d %d",i,i++,i);
return 0;
}
The result is:
23 22 23
how exactly post increment is working here ?
You cannot test correctly in this context.
The order of parameter evaluation for function parameters is undefined, hence you will have platform-dependent results.
The way i++ works actually is by first returning the old value and later incrementing, but that is a bad test.
Judging by the result you got, i++ is evaluated and returns the pre- incremented value. Then, the value of i, the return value of i++, and the value of i are passed to the print function.
This isn't ever something that you should rely on, as you may get different answers on different compilers or even with different optimization settings. As in the other answer, the order of parameter evaluation is undefined behavior.
This question already has answers here:
Why are these constructs using pre and post-increment undefined behavior?
(14 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
I am executing this c program on gcc compiler and getting strange results.
So how is it possible
code:
#include<stdio.h>
int main()
{
int i;
i =10;
printf(" %d %d %d ",i++,i++,i); //output : 11 10 12
return 0;
}
as per me result should be 10 11 12 but I am getting 11 10 12.
How is it possible?
In C++, the order of evaluation of function arguments is undefined so if you use the increment operator multiple times in the argument to a particular function there is no 'correct' answer, they may be evaluated in any arbitrary order.
Please familiarize yourself with the concept of Sequence points. Only at such defined sequence points is guaranteed that all side effects of previous evaluations are performed. There are no sequence points between the list of arguments of a function. So, it leads to undefined behavior.
This question already has answers here:
Why are these constructs using pre and post-increment undefined behavior?
(14 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I have encountered a sorcery today.
http://codepad.org/VW2vTpWw
Language: C
Code:
#include <stdio.h>
main()
{
int i = 5;
i = i++;
printf ("%i", i);
}
Output:
6
How? Why?
This is supposed to be tricky code but the other way around. The negligent programmer would think that i = i++ is just simple increment but it's not. Yet it works like one here. It's supposed to be 5! Like in JavaScript.
What should be happening.
i gets the value of 5.
i++ returns 5.
i is post incremented by i++ (to 6).
i gets the value of 5 (returned by i++).
the value of i (5) gets printed.
Yet it is 6.
I haven't been able to find a description to this on SO, or the whole internet (just the other way around).
What is broken here?
Please explain.
It is undefined behavior to store more than once to an object without an intervening sequence point.
In particular, your step 3 and 4 have no defined ordering, the increment (and store) or the store could happen first.