>>20
I think
>>19 just translated
>>18's line into Lisp as an example. It looks correct: the first line increments x, the second line saves the value of x to be returned from the expression, and then increments x once again, which is the same as C's ++x++.
Purely functional programming has nothing to do with this thread, and most Lispers will write side-effecting code when it makes sense to do so. Even if
>>19's code is side-effecting, it's still returning a value, which doesn't make it non-functional, it just makes it side-effecting.
IHBT