Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.in-chemnitz.de!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Top 10 most common hard skills listed on resumes...
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 06:44:27 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <86cylqw2f8.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <vab101$3er$1@reader1.panix.com> <vah4hr$2b9i8$5@dont-email.me> <vahngt$2dtm9$1@dont-email.me> <87r0abzcsj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vai1ec$2fns2$1@dont-email.me> <874j75zftu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <valrj7$367a8$2@dont-email.me> <87mskwy9t1.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vanq4h$3iieb$1@dont-email.me> <875xrkxlgo.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vapitn$3u1ub$1@dont-email.me> <87o75bwlp8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vaps06$3vg8l$1@dont-email.me> <871q27weeh.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240829083200.195@kylheku.com> <87v7zjuyd8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240829084851.962@kylheku.com> <87mskvuxe9.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <vaq9tu$1te8$1@dont-email.me> <875xrivrg0.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20240829191404.887@kylheku.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 15:44:28 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e18e7e841c3e455d36004383aa145572";
	logging-data="555522"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+WY9BUQa1jYcuYwhVIv9mIExAucmT96ys="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AdararpdY+Hc6ga/YoDNumUCupM=
	sha1:IG57sqtzy+7UCughMqpC5GYb4NY=
Bytes: 2593

Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> writes:

> On 2024-08-29, Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
>>
>>> I think that these (with x, y having compatible scalar types):
>>>
>>>    x + 1 = y;
>>>    (x + 1) = y;         // in case above was parsed differently
>>>
>>> are both valid syntax in C. It will fail for a different reason:
>>> an '+' term is not a valid lvalue.
>>
>> The compiler must tell you that neither is valid C.  That's
>> because what is required on each side of assignment is not
>> exactly the same thing.  It's a distraction to argue about why
>> each is not valid C as both have errors that require diagnostic
>> at compile time.
>
> Bart is only saying that it's valid syntax, not that it's valid C.
>
> According to the ISO C syntax (not taking into account contraints,
> which are not syntax) that view is justified.

The second line is syntactically well-formed.  The first line is
not.