Postdecrement is inefficient and dangerous

http://www.codeguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=231052

(If this is true, why is the language not named ++C? I don't understand.)

>>21
No, I'm not translating >>18's anything. OP posted some crap about post increment/decrement being dangerous. I posted the versions of post/pre incrementation in lisp, pointing out the infallability of these forms, thus, thread over.

If I were to translate >>18, first I'd have to give my own meaning to ++i++ since it's undefined behavior in both C and that other language; secondly, if we assume it to be what you provided, then I'd write the code as:

(prog1 #1=(incf x) #1#)
Or

(1- (incf x 2))