From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 References: <55C22EED.4040704@xenomai.org> <20150805172427.GA21690@hermes.click-hack.org> <55C30F85.1090505@xenomai.org> <20150806074939.GA20331@hermes.click-hack.org> <55C31423.6070008@xenomai.org> <208C6975C932E94F86239FEA59CCA632E0D9E8A1@AUSMXMBX02.mrws.biz> From: Philippe Gerum Message-ID: <55C3795D.5000703@xenomai.org> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 17:12:29 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <208C6975C932E94F86239FEA59CCA632E0D9E8A1@AUSMXMBX02.mrws.biz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai] Segfaults and ENOMEM during rt_event_create() List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dietmar.schindler@manroland-web.com Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org On 08/06/2015 11:25 AM, dietmar.schindler@manroland-web.com wrote: >> Von: Philippe Gerum >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. August 2015 10:01 >> >> ..., but the ternary operator is a bit special since by >> design, it won't compete for precedence with the expressions it evaluates. > > Actually, this is not special - no operator will "compete for precedence with the expressions it evaluates", because _which_ expressions it evaluates is determined by the very outcome of the "competition for precedence". And sure enough, the expression > > b = a ? 0 : 1 > I would tend to think that associativity is part of the issue. e.g. right association solves the ambiguity between multiple assignments operators with the same precedence. > is not equivalent to > > (b = a) ? 0 : 1 > > (but by this remark I do not at all want to advocate the undue use of parentheses). > Clearly. This said, the original remark was rather about the precedence between operators from the test expression and the operators forming the ternary conditional itself. -- Philippe.