Clarification of Exception for Rule 10.4

[Steve Montgomery]

I agree with your reasoning and I suspect that this is a mistake in the document.

However, although the example

Code:

u8a += cha

should probably be compliant with Rule 10.4, I believe that it would break Rule 10.3 because the RHS of the assignment would be essentially character but the LHS would be essentially unsigned.

So, I think that this expression still wouldn't be acceptable under MISRA C:2012 but for a different reason.