This question already has answers here:
Is Short Circuit Evaluation guaranteed In C++ as it is in Java?
(2 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
If I write:
if(somePtr != NULL && somePtr->someFun() == SUCCESS )
{
/**/
}
Will it be assured that somePtr != NULL will be checked before somePtr->someFun() == SUCCESS?
Is there any chance that my compiler will reorder these two?
Is there any chance that my compiler will reorder these two?
Nope. It is guaranteed that && evaluates the second expression only if the first one is true (incidentally, it also introduces a sequence point into the whole expression).
The && operator groups left-to-right. The operands are both contextually converted to type bool (Clause 4). The result is true if both operands are true and false otherwise. Unlike &, && guarantees left-to-right evaluation: the second operand is not evaluated if the first operand is false.
The result is a bool. If the second expression is evaluated, every value computation and side effect associated with the first expression is sequenced before every value computation and side effect associated with the second expression.
(C++11, [expr.log.and]; emphasis added)
Related
This question already has answers here:
Is short-circuiting logical operators mandated? And evaluation order?
(7 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
In an OR evaluation does C++ continue evaluating past the first TRUE it finds?
ie.
if(Foo() || Bar())
{
//..
}
If Foo() returns true will Bar() be skipped completely or will it also run that function?
Operators && and || perform so called short-circuit evaluation, which means they do not evaluate the second operand if the result is known after evaluating the first. So no, Bar() would not be evaluated in this case.
EDIT: That's the built-in functionality, as other people said. If they are overloaded, you obviously can't rely on it anymore.
The built-in || operator short-circuits. The left-hand expression is guaranteed to be evaluated first, and if the result is true, the right-hand expression is not evaluated.
The && operator is the opposite. The left-hand expression is evaluated first and if it evaluates to false then the right-hand expression is not evaluated.
Note that this does not hold for user-defined operator|| and operator&& overloads. Those do not provide short-circuit evaluation. Both sides of the expression will be evaluated.
Many times I see (and sometimes write) code similar to this example:
int a=0, b=2;
if( a && (b=func())!=0 ) {
//...
The question is: does the standard guarantee these statements?
b will be not touched (and remain value 2)
func() will not be called
And vice-versa, if we write if( func()!=0 && a ) - does the standard guarantee func() will be called?
I'm interested in the particular standard paragraph defining this is legitimate.
UPD: my typo, changed from int a=1 to int a=0
To the exact question;
The question is: does standard guarantee these statements?
To the updated question; given a=0. If a==0, then yes, the short circuit evaluation would kick in and func() would not be called; the second operand would not be evaluated.
If a=1 (as it was originally), the opposite; func() will be called - a is 1 thus "true", as a result the second operand is evaluated (it is a logical AND), b will change. If the operator had been || (logical OR), then short circuit evaluation would kick in and func() would not be called.
And vice-versa, if we write if( func()!=0 && a ) -- does standard guarantee func() will be called?
Yes, the first operand is always evaluated.
Yes, short circuit evaluation is guaranteed for C++;
§5.14 Logical AND operator
1 The && operator groups left-to-right. The operands are both contextually converted to bool (Clause 4). The result is true if both operands are true and false otherwise. Unlike &, && guarantees left-to-right evaluation: the second operand is not evaluated if the first operand is false.
2 The result is a bool. If the second expression is evaluated, every value computation and side effect associated with the first expression is sequenced before every value computation and side effect associated with the second expression.
§5.15 Logical OR operator
1 The || operator groups left-to-right. The operands are both contextually converted to bool (Clause 4). It returns true if either of its operands is true, and false otherwise. Unlike |, || guarantees left-to-right evaluation; moreover, the second operand is not evaluated if the first operand evaluates to true.
2 The result is a bool. If the second expression is evaluated, every value computation and side effect associated with the first expression is sequenced before every value computation and side effect associated with the second expression.
The corresponding quotes for C are;
§6.5.13 Logical AND operator
4 Unlike the bitwise binary & operator, the && operator guarantees left-to-right evaluation; if the second operand is evaluated, there is a sequence point between the evaluations of the first and second operands. If the first operand compares equal to 0, the second operand is not evaluated.
§6.5.14 Logical OR operator
4 Unlike the bitwise | operator, the || operator guarantees left-to-right evaluation; if the second operand is evaluated, there is a sequence point between the evaluations of the first and second operands. If the first operand compares unequal to 0, the second operand is not evaluated.
From the C-90 standard.
6.5.13 Logical AND operator
....
4 Unlike the bitwise binary & operator, the && operator guarantees left-to-right evaluation;
there is a sequence point after the evaluation of the first operand. If the first operand
compares equal to 0, the second operand is not evaluated.
Similarly for the Logical OR operator.
The && operator requires both operands to be true. If the first operand evaluates to false, then the second operand will not be evaluated. But beause a is 1, it is considered true and the second expression (operand) is evaluated. Thus func() is called and its result assigned to b and then b is tested to be non-zero.
The standard guarantees that the statements in a sequence of && are evaluated from left to right, and that as soon as one of them evaluates to false, the ones to the right of that will not be evaluated.
The question is: does standard guarantee these statements?
b will be not touched (and remain value 2)
func() will not be called
No, in fact both of them wrong in this case. Because it's operator && so no shortcut logic can be applied in this particular case.
If you change it to || then your statements are correct - only then the evaluation of the first operand (a = 1 in this case) will be enough and the rest is ignored.
As the question changed to a = 0 then yes, both statements are correct and guaranteed.
This question already has answers here:
Operator Precedence vs Order of Evaluation
(6 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
I was reading this post
Precedence of && over ||
. It says that even though the precedence of && is more than ||, we need to evaluate the expression from left to right and if the first expression turns out to be true, then we don't need to evaluate the second expression.
But precedence is the order of evaluation and accordingly all pre increments should be evaluated first and then (++j && ++k) should be evaluated. The post seems to be ambiguous on this point. Is it not?
From the standard
§5.14 Logical AND operator
The && operator groups left-to-right. The operands are both contextually converted to bool. The result is true if both operands are true and false otherwise. Unlike &, && guarantees left-to-right evaluation: the second operand is not evaluated if the first operand is false.
The result is a bool. If the second expression is evaluated, every value computation and side effect associated with the first expression is sequenced before every value computation and side effect associated with the second expression.
So, in your example:
(++j && ++k)
The first evaluation will be
++j
Then (assuming j hasn't become 0 and therefore falsey)
++k
Then
j && k // with both values incremented
This question already has answers here:
Is short-circuiting logical operators mandated? And evaluation order?
(7 answers)
How does C++ handle &&? (Short-circuit evaluation) [duplicate]
(7 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
Given two conditions with an && connection. I know that the order of evaluation is from left to right. But if the first condition resolves to false, it the second condition guaranteed to not get evaluated?
#define SIZE
bool array[SIZE];
int index;
// play with variables
// ...
if(index < SIZE && array[index])
{
// ...
}
In this example, if the first condition is false the second must not be evaluated since the access in the array would be out of range.
By the way I cannot simply nest the conditionals with two if statements, since actually I need the inverse like (!(in_range && get_element)). With nested statements I would need to use goto to jump over the code block below that.
But if the first condition resolves to false, it the second condition guaranteed to not get evaluated?
Yes, that's C++'s short circuiting. Per paragraph 5.14/1 of the C++11 Standard:
The && operator groups left-to-right. The operands are both contextually converted to bool (Clause 4).
The result is true if both operands are true and false otherwise. Unlike &, && guarantees left-to-right
evaluation: the second operand is not evaluated if the first operand is false.
As MatthieuM. correctly mentions in the comments, the above applies only to the built-in logical AND and logical OR operators: if those operators are overloaded, invoking them is treated as a regular function call (so no short-circuiting applies and no order of evaluation is guaranteed).
As specified in paragraph 5/2:
[Note: Operators can be overloaded, that is, given meaning when applied to expressions of class type (Clause
9) or enumeration type (7.2). Uses of overloaded operators are transformed into function calls as described
in 13.5. Overloaded operators obey the rules for syntax specified in Clause 5, but the requirements of
operand type, value category, and evaluation order are replaced by the rules for function call. [...] —end note ]
This question already has answers here:
Closed 11 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Safety concerns about short circuit evaluation
What does the standard say about evaluating && expressions - does it guarantee that evaluation of parameters will stop at the first false?
E.g.:
Foo* p;
//....
if ( p && p->f() )
{
//do something
}
is the f() guaranteed not to be called if p == NULL?
Also, is the order of evaluation guaranteed to be the order of appearence in the clause?
Might the optimizer change something like:
int x;
Foo* p;
//...
if ( p->doSomethingReallyExpensive() && x == 3 )
{
//....
}
to a form where it evaluates x==3 first? Or will it always execute the really expensive function first?
I know that on most compilers (probably all) evaluation stops after the first false is encountered, but what does the standard say about it?
What does the standard say about evaluating && expressions - does it guarantee that evaluation of parameters will stop at the first false?
Yes. That is called short-circuiting.
Also, is the order of evaluation guaranteed to be the order of appearence in the clause?
Yes. From left to right. The operand before which the expression short-circuited doesn't get evaluated.
int a = 0;
int b = 10;
if ( a != 0 && (b=100)) {}
cout << b << endl; //prints 10, not 100
In fact, the above two points are the keypoint in my solution here:
Find maximum of three number in C without using conditional statement and ternary operator
In the ANSI C standard 3.3.13:
Unlike the bitwise binary & operator, the && operator guarantees
left-to-right evaluation; there is a sequence point after the
evaluation of the first operand. If the first operand compares equal
to 0, the second operand is not evaluated.
There is an equivalent statement in the C++ standard
&& (and ||) establish sequence points. So the expression on the left-hand side will get evaluated before the right-hand side. Also, yes, if the left-hand side is false/true (for &&/||), the right-hand side is not evaluated.
What does the standard say about evaluating && expressions - does it guarantee that evaluation of parameters will stop at the first false?
Also, is the order of evaluation guaranteed to be the order of appearence in the clause?
5.14/1. Unlike &, && guarantees left-to-right evaluation: the second operand is not evaluated if the first operand is false.
This only works for the standard && operator, user defined overloads of operator && don't have this guarantee, they behave like regular function call semantics.
Might the optimizer change something like:
if ( p->doSomethingReallyExpensive() && x == 3 )
to a form where it evaluates x==3 first?
An optimizer may decide to evaluate x == 3 first since it is an expression with no side-effects associated if x is not modified by p->doSomethingReallyExpensive(), or even evaluate it after p->doSomethingReallyExpensive() already returned false. However, the visible behavior is guaranteed to be the previously specified: Left to right evaluation and short-circuit. That means that while x == 3 may be evaluated first and return false the implementation still has to evaluate p->doSomethingReallyExpensive().