See I always thought most people who wrote foo++ actually <i>meant</i> ++foo and it typically only came up when the operator precedence made the two not equivalent, causing a subtle bug.<p>I can&#x27;t even think of a time where I really needed a use-then-increment operator where I wouldn&#x27;t have just used the value, then incremented it on the next line anyway (maybe even with a post-increment out of habit).