Lethal Sequence of Operators

[rbj%icst-cmr at smoke.UUCP]

	In article <1631 at mmintl.UUCP> franka at mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) replies:
	>The problem is that "<-" is a legal sequence of operators.  Consider
	>"if (x<-1) { ...}".
	
	DIVISION	/
	INDIRECTION	*
	
	The problem is that /* is a legal sequence of operators.  Consider
	
		int r, i, *ip; r = i/*p;

Consider also:

ADDITION	+
INCREMENT	++

Now try `a+++b' intending `a+(++b)'. Surprise!
	
	As usual, if there is some kind of ambiguity, pick a disambiguator.

What he said.
	
	(This is not intended to imply that I think `<-' is a good assignment
	operator.  On the other hand, the preceding sentence is not intended
	to imply that I think `<-' is a bad assignment operator.)

That is implied. Is that what you intended?
	
	In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 1516)
	UUCP:	seismo!umcp-cs!chris
	CSNet:	chris at umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris at mimsy.umd.edu

	(Root Boy) Jim Cottrell		<rbj at icst-cmr.arpa>
...ich bin in einem dusenjet ins jahr 53 vor chr...ich lande im antiken Rom...
  einige gladiatoren spielen scrabble...ich rieche PIZZA...

P.S. Okay, so now I know what the Firesign Theatre said. Now what does it mean?