#include <iostream.h> int main(int argc, char* argv[])	{	int i=0;	++++i;	cout<<i<<endl;	return 0;	}      

quote:

The increment and decrement operators present a dilemma because of the pre- and postfix versions. Both versions change the object and so cannot treat the object as a const. The prefix version returns the value of the object after it was changed, so you expect to get back the object that was changed. Thus, with prefix you can just return *this as a reference. The postfix version is supposed to return the value before the value is changed, so you''re forced to create a separate object to represent that value and return it. So with postfix you must return by value if you want to preserve the expected meaning. (Note that you''ll sometimes find the increment and decrement operators returning an int or bool to indicate, for example, whether an object designed to move through a list is at the end of that list.) Now the question is: Should these be returned as const or nonconst? If you allow the object to be modified and someone writes (++a).func( ), func( ) will be operating on a itself, but with (a++).func( ), func( ) operates on the temporary object returned by the postfix operator++. Temporary objects are automatically const, so this would be flagged by the compiler, but for consistency''s sake it may make more sense to make them both const, as was done here. Or you may choose to make the prefix version non-const and the postfix const. Because of the variety of meanings you may want to give the increment and decrement operators, they will need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

quote:Original post by DigitalDelusion
So yes you could say that ++++i should be legal but for ints it aint and thus you shouldn''t let it be possible for you own classes either.

int main(void)}  int i = 0;  ++++i;} 

    p = r[++i] + g[++i] + b[++i];