linux-c-programming.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ron Michael Khu <ronkhu@ntsp.nec.co.jp>
To: Vadiraj <vadiraj.cs@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-c-programming <linux-c-programming@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ternary operator
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 01:44:30 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <42C18C7E.6030100@hq.ntsp.nec.co.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6eee1c405062810224f4db7e5@mail.gmail.com>

i dont know the reason but the problem could be shrink down to

func2()
{
}

func1()
{
  printf( "%d\n", func2() );
}

int main()
{
  printf( "%d\n", func2() );
  printf("%d\n",func1() ) ;
}

u will notice that the return value from func2(which does not specify 
any explicit return value)
differs when called from main() and from func1()..

this is not a problem about the ternary operator..
this is an issue about the use of implicit/explicit return values...
why are u not  making use of explicit return? and explicit use of int as 
the return type in the
function declarations??


Vadiraj wrote:

>Hi List,
>
> I'm confused with the behavior of this program..
>
>func4()
>{
>    return 3;
>}
>func3()
>{
>    return 2;
>}
>func2()
>{
>}
>
>func1()
>{
>    return(func2()?func3():func4()) ;
>}
>int main()
>{
>     
>     printf("%d\n",func1() ) ;                       // this prints 3
>     printf("%d\n",func2()?func3():func4()) ;  // this prints 2
>}
>
> I dont understand whats making the two statements to behave differently.
>
>
>
>  
>



  reply	other threads:[~2005-06-28 17:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-06-28 17:22 ternary operator Vadiraj
2005-06-28 17:44 ` Ron Michael Khu [this message]
2005-06-28 17:49 ` Steve Graegert
2005-06-28 17:15   ` Luiz Fernando Capitulino
2005-06-28 18:24     ` Steve Graegert
2005-06-28 18:24   ` Vadiraj
2005-06-28 18:47     ` Steve Graegert

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=42C18C7E.6030100@hq.ntsp.nec.co.jp \
    --to=ronkhu@ntsp.nec.co.jp \
    --cc=linux-c-programming@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vadiraj.cs@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).