My "lawyer mode" rant was to show that C is playing catch-up in some areas, and that the rules are anything but clear-cut.
I wouldn't consider perl code that the OP wrote, stupid. In fact I might quite possibly have used the same construct...
In reply to Re^7: Why does the first $c evaluate to the incremented value ... (hahaha)
by oiskuu
in thread Why does the first $c evaluate to the incremented value in [$c, $c += $_] ?
by smls
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |