From: mordor.nospam@fly.srk.fer.hr   
      
   On 2013-01-28, goran.pusic@googlemail.com  wrote:   
   >   
   > This is... ahem... unfair ;-)   
   >   
   > But the sequence point is at the end of the statement, regardless of   
   > whether you have printf("fmt", modify_x(), x) or operators. You use   
   > operators in plain C and can screw it up in much the same way, e.g. I   
   > dunno,   
   >   
   > whatever = modify_x() << 9 | x;   
      
   *sigh* Have you read at all what I wrote?  Anyway, I'll write it again.   
      
   I'm well aware of these issues in contexts that don't have to do with IO.   
   HOWEVER, IO is special because the order of evaluation very much matters.   
   Is it unfair to expect that the language and its standard libraries do IO   
   right when they provide a special syntax for it?   
      
      
   --   
         [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]   
         [ comp.lang.c++.moderated.    First time posters: Do this! ]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)