Undoc'd Feature?

[RPNerd]

(07-11-2022 07:49 PM)ijabbott Wrote:  However, for `i = i++;`, the `i++` part says that the old value of `i` plus 1 will be stored in `i`, and the `i = i` part says that the old value of `i` will be stored in `i`, so there is a conflict.

I see no conflict there.

in:

Code:

i = i++;

...as in any assignment, the rhs is evaluated so that the result can be assigned to the lhs variable, which just happens to be the same variable in this particular case.

"i++" is evaluated as the initial value of i. A by-product of that evaluation is post-incrementing i but that doesn't matter because the initial value is then assigned back to i.

Basically, the result is a big fat NOP with a few CPU cycles wasted incrementing i and then setting it back to its original value unless the compiler catches this.