operator=

[Fraser Ross]

I have copied this from a books eratta list. Should the code with
operator= not be (i1.operator=(i2)).operator=(i3); ?

int i1,i2,i3;
It turns out that "(i1 = i2) = i3;" yields undefined results when i1,
i2, and i3 are ints, because i1 is modified more than once without an
intervening sequence point. This is not a problem for user-defined
types, because for such types, the above is be equal to
i1.operator=(i2.operator=(i3)); and that's fine, because there's a
sequence point before and after each function call.



Fraser.