'goto" gone from computer languages or is it!

This is three modifications to the same Lvalue within the same sequence interval - it is therefore possible for the increment operations to be performed in any order, and even deferred to just before the next sequence point, so results could be: 2 1 0 0 1 2 (or any other ordering of these numbers) 0 0 0 The only thing you can be *reasonably certain of* (see below) is that at least one of the "results" must be < 1, at least two of the results must be < 2, and all three results must be < 3 (since each operation must return the value prior to the increment, and only one increment is associated with each operation). So, although unlikely that the compiler would defer two operations and not another, it is potentially possible that the "results" could also be 0 0 1, 0 0 2, 0 1 1 etc. (in any order). Officially this type of code (that which modifies an Lvalue multiple times within the same sequence interval) invokes "undefined behaviour", which means that the compiler can do "anything" - although highly unlikely, the compiler can happily return 6 6 6 in this case, and leave the value of i at 31415 (or anything else) ... and be performing in a perfectly legal sense - undefined operation is exactly that. The function performed is not defined by the standard. On other words, it's not valid 'C' (although it is syntactically correct, and most compilers will accept it without a diagnostic). I think the OP's point has been completely missed (that a valid program is a inherently very definitive and detailed specification). Regards, Dave (In a way this is topical for me since my compiler is 17 years old this year) -- dave04a (at) Dave Dunfield dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com com Collector of vintage computing equipment: http://www.parse.com/~ddunfield/museum/index.html