On 16/05/2018 16:09, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2018, 6:36 PM bartc <b...@freeuk.com> wrote:
On 16/05/2018 01:04, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
I'm not a C coder, but I think that specific example would be immune to
the bug we are discussing, since (I think) you can't chain assignments in
C. Am I right?
Assignments can be chained in C (with right-to-left precedence) as can
augmented assignments (+= and so on).
Yes, but not in the particular example that Steven was referring to, which
you elided from your quoting.
I was responding to the chained assignment bit:
a = b = c = d = x;
is allowed, but (depending on implementation details), the first = might
be a different kind of assignment from the other three.
open(...) is not a valid LHS for assignment.
The LHS needs to be an lvalue. A function result by itself won't be.
open() would need to be a macro that expands to an lvalue, or used like
this when open() returns a pointer:
a = *open() = x;
So it only needs an extra * (subject to the correct types of everything
involved) for both these "=" to be plausible.
--
bartc
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
